6,934 research outputs found
The 1988 Nationaf Academy of Sciences (NAS) Award for Scientilc Reviewing has
No full textEric R. Kandel, Kandel’s influence on the study of the cellular basis of behavior is trad through lS1 ° research fronts on both the sea snail,@ysia as well as earlier work on the marmnafian hippocampus. Kandel’s thoughts on his research work, as well as scientific review, are highlighted
Reviewing the reviewers
No full textIn this article, the author reflects on his 12 years' experience of the academic refereeing process. In doing so, he aims to provide some encouragement to more junior academics faced with harsh and disheartening reviews, and perhaps to ask some reviewers to consider their approach to the review process. At its best, and done in a constructive manner, the review process can be a valuable learning experience for the author, with the finished product much improved as a result of constructive, informed criticism. However, on occasions reviews are marred by uninformed and/or unfair criticism, sometimes reflecting the reviewer's narrowness, or mode of thinking. Faced with such risks, authors must remain resilient and believe in the value of their contribution
Publishing Workshops: Number 4 Preparing a Manuscript – Reviewing Literature
No full textThis paper is a further contribution to the workshop series on preparing manuscripts for publication. For earlier articles see the 1996 July and November issues of *Nursing Praxis in New Zealand. *Having previously concentrated on reporting research, both quantitative and qualitative, we now focus on reviewing literature. A literature review can be the subject of an article in its own right, or, as is probably more common, feature as a component of a research report. In our earlier papers (Crisp, Chick, Rodgers & Smith, 1996) attention was directed mainly at the first of these and a distinction was made in terms of whether the author was "...evaluating current research in a particular area, determining its strengths and weaknesses and identifying areas where further research is required." (p. 26). The two are not mutually exclusive, the difference being mainly one of emphasis
Reviewing the Author-Function in the Age of Wikipedia
No full textIn Reviewing the Author-Function in the Age of Wikipedia, Amit Ray and Erhardt Graeff examine how wiki technology challenges traditional concepts of authorship and authority in knowledge production. The authors build on poststructuralist theory, particularly Roland Barthes\u27s Death of the Author and Michel Foucault\u27s concept of the author-function, to analyze how wikis destabilize individual authorship in favor of collaborative, community-driven content creation.
The essay argues that wikis represent a fundamental shift from the Romantic notion of the solitary author-genius to what they term the wiki writing process —a dynamic system where traditional roles of reader, writer, and editor blur into a unified community of users. Using Wikipedia as a primary case study, the authors demonstrate how the platform\u27s structure (article, discussion, and history pages) creates a digital palimpsest that archives all contributions while enabling continuous revision.
Through analysis of Wikipedia\u27s editing patterns and community oversight mechanisms, Ray and Graeff show how wikis embody poststructuralist principles in practice, creating what they call serial collaborations that exist in perpetual flux. The authors conclude that wikis represent an evolved form of textual production that realizes Foucault\u27s vision of discourse freed from traditional authorial constraints, offering new possibilities for collaborative knowledge creation while challenging established notions of intellectual authority and ownership
Author interview: Q and A with Dr Phillipa K. Chong on inside the critics’ circle: book reviewing in uncertain times
No full textIn this author interview, we speak to Dr Phillipa K. Chong about her recent book, Inside the Critics’ Circle: Book Reviewing in Uncertain Times, which takes readers behind the scenes of fiction reviewing, drawing on interviews with critics to explore the complexities of the review-writing process within a broader context of uncertainty
Editorial: Single- Versus Double-Blind Reviewing
No full textThis editorial analyzes from a variety of perspectives the controversial issue of single-blind versus double-blind reviewing. In single-blind reviewing, the reviewer is unknown to the author, but the identity of the author is known to the reviewer. Double-blind reviewing is more symmetric: The identity of the author and the reviewer are not revealed to each other. We first examine the significant scholarly literature regarding blind reviewing. We then list six benefits claimed for double-blind reviewing and 21 possible costs. To compare these benefits and costs, we propose a double-blind policy for TODS that attempts to minimize the costs while retaining the core benefit of fairness that double-blind reviewing provides, and evaluate that policy against each of the listed benefits and costs. Following that is a general discussion considering several questions: What does this have to do with TODS, does bias exist in computer science, and what is the appropriate decision procedure? We explore the “knobs ” a policy design can manipulate to fine-tune a double-blind review policy. This editorial ends with a specific decision
The Process and Analysis of Film Reviewing
No full textabstract: "The Process and Analysis of Film Reviewing" is a two-part project that discovers what goes into the film reviewing process and what produces a good film review. A film review website entitled "Reel Reviews" (reelfilmreviews.com) was created, which features original content such as film reviews, trailers and information about special features and events relevant to the film industry. The paper portion of the project takes an analytical look at the current state of the film reviewing world and addresses the changes in technology that have an impact on how film reviewing is done
IRB (with author information)
No full textThis IRB contains author information, which is private for reviewing purposes
The positive power of the reviewing process
No full textInternational audienceThis article presents the author's thoughts on the peer reviewing process in publishing. The author reflects on the community of marketing researchers and how peer reviews help them reach their goal of knowledge advancement. The author describes the review procedure, emphasizing the importance of timeliness, positivity, and reputation. Information is also provided on looking at research papers for their abstracts, backgrounds, literature reviews, research objectives and methodology, and conclusions based on findings.<br/
The relationship between quality of research and citation frequency.
No full textBACKGROUND: Citation counts are often regarded as a measure of the utilization and contribution of published articles. The objective of this study is to assess whether statistical reporting and statistical errors in the analysis of the primary outcome are associated with the number of citations received. METHODS: We evaluated all original research articles published in 1996 in four psychiatric journals. The statistical and reporting quality of each paper was assessed and the number of citations received up to 2005 was obtained from the Web of Science database. We then examined whether the number of citations was associated with the quality of the statistical analysis and reporting. RESULTS: A total of 448 research papers were included in the citation analysis. Unclear or inadequate reporting of the research question and primary outcome were not statistically significantly associated with the citation counts. After adjusting for journal, extended description of statistical procedures had a positive effect on the number of citations received. Inappropriate statistical analysis did not affect the number of citations received. Adequate reporting of the primary research question, statistical methods and primary findings were all associated with the journal visibility and prestige. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of published research, measures of reporting quality and appropriate statistical analysis were not associated with the number of citations. The journal in which a study is published appears to be as important as the statistical reporting quality in ensuring dissemination of published medical science
- …
