Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
There are deep problems with science publishing. But the way to fix this is not to curtail open-access publishing. It is to fix peer review." [24] Eisen pointed out the irony of a subscription-based journal like Science publishing this report when its own peer review has failed so badly before, as in the 2010 publication of the arsenic DNA paper.
Replication has been called "the cornerstone of science". [9] [10] Environmental health scientist Stefan Schmidt began a 2009 review with this description of replication: Replication is one of the central issues in any empirical science. To confirm results or hypotheses by a repetition procedure is at the basis of any scientific conception.
Scholarly peer review or academic peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of having a draft version of a researcher's methods and findings reviewed (usually anonymously) by experts (or "peers") in the same field.
Various journal review websites (crowd-sourced or expert-run) have been started, some focusing on the quality of the peer review process and extending to non-OA publications. [128] [129] A group of libraries and publishers launched an awareness campaign. [130] [131] A number of measures have been suggested to further combat predatory journals.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, academia had seen a quick increase in fast-track peer-review articles dealing with SARS-CoV-2 problems. [8] As a result, a number of papers have been retracted made "Retraction Tsunami" [ 9 ] due to quality and/or data issues, leading many experts to ponder not just the quality of peer review but also standards of ...
Peer review is a central concept for most academic publishing; other scholars in a field must find a work sufficiently high in quality for it to merit publication. A secondary benefit of the process is an indirect guard against plagiarism since reviewers are usually familiar with the sources consulted by the author(s).
Peer review in writing is a pivotal component among various peer review mechanisms, often spearheaded by educators and involving student participation, particularly in academic settings. It constitutes a fundamental process in academic and professional writing, serving as a systematic means to ensure the quality, effectiveness, and credibility ...
Low-quality science. Post-publication peer review, a staple of open science, has been criticized as promoting the production of lower quality papers that are extremely voluminous. [96] Specifically, critics assert that as quality is not guaranteed by preprint servers, the veracity of papers will be difficult to assess by individual readers.