Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Peer review in scientific journals assumes that the article reviewed has been honestly prepared. The process occasionally detects fraud, but is not designed to do so. [204] When peer review fails and a paper is published with fraudulent or otherwise irreproducible data, the paper may be retracted. A 1998 experiment on peer review with a ...
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory (ISSN 0000-0175, and ISSN 0000-2100) is the standard library directory and database providing information about popular and academic magazines, scientific journals, newspapers and other serial publications.
Scopus is a scientific abstract and citation database, launched by the academic publisher Elsevier as a competitor to older Web of Science in 2004. [1] An ensuing competition between the two databases has been characterized as "intense" and is considered to significantly benefit their users in terms of continuous improvent in coverage, search/analysis capabilities, but not in price.
Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work . [1] It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.
The New York Times described the site as a mashup of Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. [3] Site members may follow a research interest, in addition to following other individual members. [10] It has a blogging feature for users to write short reviews on peer-reviewed articles. [10]
Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. . Released in beta in November 2004, the Google Scholar index includes peer-reviewed online academic journals and books, conference papers, theses and dissertations, preprints, abstracts, technical reports, and other ...
For how editors use peer reviews, see WP:PR/Instructions. For an overview of the technical process, see Wikipedia:Peer review/Tools . This adds a toolbox to peer review pages.
Since the review is transcluded on the peer review page, the category gets added to the peer review page too. To find the culprit, visit the AnomieBOT page corresponding to the topic under which the entire peer review page is listed, and look for strange entries. The entry immediately below the mess is likely to be the cause of the problem.