Das gängige Modell zur Sicherung der Qualität wissenschaftlicher Publikationen ist die Peer-Review: Die Bewertung einer zur Veröffentlichung eingereichten wissenschaftlichen Publikation durch einen oder mehrere unabhängige Fachgutachter
Anyone who thinks peer review is a process of nudges and winks from your mates has never faced the harsh reality of having your work pulled apart, says Jenny Rohn (who has).
Just a small number of bad referees can significantly undermine the ability of the peer-review system to select the best scientific papers. That is according to a pair of complex systems researchers in Austria who have modelled an academic publishing system and showed that human foibles can have a dramatic effect on the quality of published science.
In this blog post, Brian Johnson, Managing Editor of The Chemical Record, addresses some of the issues faced by peer reviewers, from the perspective of an editor.
Online reference managers are extraordinary productivity tools, but it would be a mistake to take this as their primary interest for the academic community. As it is often the case for social software services, online reference managers are becoming power