The Principles of Fair Allocation of Peer-Review: How Much Should a Researcher be Expected to Contribute?

Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (4):825-828 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There seems to be reluctance amongst scientists to invest some of their own time in the peer-review of manuscripts. As a result, journal editors often struggle to secure reviewers for a given manuscript in a timely manner. Here, two simple principles are proposed, which could fairly allocate the contribution of individual researchers to the peer-review process

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/s11948-014-9584-2

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,611

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

The principles and practices of Peer review.Ronald N. Kostoff - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):19-34.
Review of the Ethics and Etiquettes of Time Management of Manuscript Peer Review. [REVIEW]Malhar N. Kumar - 2014 - Journal of Academic Ethics 12 (4):333-346.
Promoting F.A.I.T.h. In Peer review: Five core attributes of effective Peer review. [REVIEW]Leigh Turner - 2003 - Journal of Academic Ethics 1 (2):181-188.
What We Owe the Author: rethinking editorial peer review.N. J. Crigger - 1998 - Nursing Ethics 5 (5):451-457.
Peer review: Selecting the best science. [REVIEW]Wendy Baldwin & Belinda Seto - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):11-17.
How Editors Decide. Oral Communication in Journal Peer Review.Stefan Hirschauer - 2015 - Human Studies 38 (1):37-55.
Responsible authorship and Peer review.James R. Wilson - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (2):155-174.
Referees, editors, and publication practices: Improving the reliability and usefulness of the Peer review system.Domenic V. Cicchetti - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):51-62.
The problem of humiliation in peer review.Debra R. Comer & Michael Schwartz - 2014 - Ethics and Education 9 (2):141-156.
Some Opinions on the Review Process of Research Papers Destined for Publication.Ehsan Roohi & Omid Mahian - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (3):809-812.
Bias in Peer Review.Carole J. Lee, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin - 2013 - Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (1):2-17.
Peer-to-peer Review and the Future of Scholarly Authority.Kathleen Fitzpatrick - 2010 - Social Epistemology 24 (3):161-179.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-09-07

Downloads
17 (#875,159)

6 months
3 (#984,719)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references