Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A variation on this theme is open peer commentary, in which commentaries from specialists are solicited on published articles and the authors are invited to respond. Journals using this process solicit and publish non-anonymous commentaries on the "target paper" together with the paper, and with original authors' reply as a matter of course.
Non-commercial servers (e.g. arXiv, Open Science Framework, Zenodo) or the author's university repository Unrestricted Unrestricted [23] British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery: Does not accept clinical research articles that have been shared as preprints. Does not accept clinical research articles that have been shared as preprints.
The possibility of rejections of papers is an important aspect in peer review. The evaluation of quality of journals is based also on rejection rate. The best journals have the highest rejection rates (around 90–95%). [39] American Psychological Association journals' rejection rates ranged "from a low of 35 per cent to a high of 85 per cent."
The article, in fact written a decade earlier by David Mazières and Eddie Kohler, was titled "Get me off your fucking mailing list" and consisted of the phrase "Get me off your fucking mailing list" being repeated for the entirety of the article body. The journal requested the researcher to "add some more recent references and do a bit of ...
The final version of an article as copyedited and typeset by the publisher is typically called the version of record. Such publishers sometimes allow certain rights to their authors, including permission to reuse parts of the paper in the author's future work, to distribute a limited number of copies.
2007 Retraction of several articles written by social psychologist Jennifer Lerner and colleagues from journals including Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin and Biological Psychiatry. [37] 2006 Retraction of Patient-specific embryonic stem cells derived from human SCNT blastocysts, written by Hwang Woo-Suk. Fabrications in the field of ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
(1) journals with higher impact factors were more likely to reject papers submitted as part of the project; (2) the chances were better, if the manuscript was allegedly based on empirical data; (3) peer reviews can be an important asset in the process of revising a manuscript; and (4) when the project authors, with academic education from ...