Search results
From The Embassy of Good Science
- be a good lab partner Mertonian norms Moral conflict and moral dilemma Peer review Poor mentoring or supervision of early career researcherers Preprint servers43 bytes (0 words) - 14:47, 19 November 2019
- About Standards of authorship Conflict of interest in peer review Conflicts of interest in the review of grant proposals Honesty Transparency Conflict of6 KB (656 words) - 17:07, 20 October 2020
- SPOC: Integrity in academic publication: authorship and peer review (section SPOC: Integrity in academic publication: authorship and peer review)learning unit we focus on peer review, which is another important aspect of academic publishing. You may have experience with being reviewed as a researcher, or6 KB (780 words) - 16:41, 21 September 2022
- contribution was Oct 22, 2021 Open access publishing: the new norm? Open peer review - transparent way of gatekeeping science5 KB (787 words) - 15:14, 22 October 2021
- Open peer review - transparent way of gatekeeping science (section Open peer review - transparent way of gatekeeping science)open peer review policies in seen in BMC series journals. BMC begun with open peer review in 1999, and since then has promoted the benefits of peer review3 KB (439 words) - 14:07, 22 October 2021
- Themes Post publication peer review (PPPR) is a type of peer review where, unlike in the traditional peer review system, the review is done after the manuscript3 KB (450 words) - 13:04, 19 April 2022
- Hostile peer review (section Hostile peer review)Education Open About Conflict of interest in peer review Conflict of interests Peer review Respect Peer review2 KB (311 words) - 10:49, 28 October 2020
- Peer review (section Peer review)About Hostile peer review Peer review Theme:F723d94e-5010-4c4a-ad26-cf56fce97a1f Honesty Accountability Reliability Respect Peer Review4 KB (564 words) - 14:06, 22 October 2021
- Peer review card game (section Peer review card game)available here. Peer review card exchange game, available at: http://europeanscienceediting.eu/articles/a-peer-review-card-exchange-game/ Peer review is an important3 KB (380 words) - 14:24, 22 October 2021
- Unfair reviewing (section Journal peer review)Cases Open About Conflict of interest in peer review Hostile peer review Peer review Honesty Fairness Peer review3 KB (453 words) - 10:41, 28 October 2020
- Peer review (section Peer review)several tools related to peer review. Online module Responsible Authorship and Peer Review discusses challenges that authors and peer reviewers are constantly868 bytes (105 words) - 11:27, 25 September 2020
- prevent everyone with potential conflict of interest to do a peer review, the quality of peer review would drop. Many researchers with knowledge and expertise3 KB (439 words) - 17:41, 26 March 2021
- Pirated Idea for Research (section Protecting peer review: Correspondence chronology and ethical analysis)she reviews. Peer reviewersSupervisors Cases Open About Education Open About Conflict of interest in peer review Accountability Respect Honesty Peer Review708 bytes (53 words) - 14:30, 6 April 2021
- Guidelines This is a guide to peer review for early career researchers. It aims to help them understand basic principles of peer review, some of its limitations501 bytes (50 words) - 13:21, 21 October 2020
- the peer review system and aims to help journal editors in publication process. The training materials included 32 statements regarding peer review in domains959 bytes (91 words) - 11:55, 20 October 2020
- Open About Education Open About Hostile peer review Peer review Peer review card game Honesty Transparency Peer review5 KB (733 words) - 10:42, 28 October 2020
- Journal peer review (section Journal peer review)and flowcharts present the whole journal peer review process. Besides providing definition and types of peer review, they describe the basic principles and744 bytes (72 words) - 13:46, 28 September 2020
- Peer Review in the Social Sciences and Humanities (section Peer Review in the Social Sciences and Humanities)About Cases Open About Open peer review - transparent way of gatekeeping science Peer review Post-publication peer review Michael Ochsner Nina Kancewicz-Hoffman8 KB (1,185 words) - 20:40, 13 March 2023
- Responsible Authorship and Peer Review - Columbia RCR Course, Module 3 (section Responsible Authorship and Peer Review - Columbia RCR Course, Module 3)Responsible Authorship and Peer Review, Research Misconduct, Collaborative Science, Data Acquisition and Management. Authorship and Peer Review is the third module3 KB (348 words) - 11:49, 7 September 2020
- Online Module: Responsible research and Peer Review (section Online Module: Responsible research and Peer Review)authorship and peer review through three cases, Q&A and some theoretical background. ResearchersStudents Honesty Accountability Authorship Peer Review Ghost authorship551 bytes (44 words) - 14:48, 10 September 2020
- Organised Crime Against the Academic Peer Review System (section Organised Crime Against the Academic Peer Review System)https://www.nature.com/news/publishing-the-peer-review-scam-1.16400 EditorsPeer reviewers Peer review Fake peer-reviewing 2016 England Honesty Integrity Responsibility2 KB (205 words) - 15:05, 5 August 2021
- Environmental journal pulls two papers for “compromised” peer review (section Environmental journal pulls two papers for “compromised” peer review)that the peer-review process had been compromised. EditorsJournal publishersJournal editorsPeer reviewers 21/3/2016 Reliabiity Honesty Peer Review PE 10 -694 bytes (49 words) - 14:13, 21 June 2021
- world of publishing. Journal editors Education Open About Peer review Reliability Honesty Peer review ethics violation Favoritism Confidentiality PE 05.15 -667 bytes (46 words) - 12:45, 6 April 2021
- Want to make sure your paper gets published? Just do your own peer review like this researcher did (section Want to make sure your paper gets published? Just do your own peer review like this researcher did)the peer review process remains impartial and uncompromised. Peer reviewersJournal editorsResearchers Yongdeng Lei 20/03/2014 China Self peer review SH946 bytes (75 words) - 13:42, 21 June 2021
- Protecting peer review: Correspondence chronology and ethical analysis (section Protecting peer review: Correspondence chronology and ethical analysis)Amir Shmuel David Leopold 2008 Canada Germany USA Respect Reliability Peer Review Data Issues Data Ownership SH 04.05 - Social and clinical psychology633 bytes (44 words) - 13:39, 5 March 2021
- Open About Peer review Retractions: correcting the scientific literature Open peer review - transparent way of gatekeeping science Peer review card game2 KB (239 words) - 21:24, 27 October 2020
- Serbian Journal Lands in Hot Water After Challenge on 24 hour Peer Review That Cost 1785 euros (section Serbian Journal Lands in Hot Water After Challenge on 24 hour Peer Review That Cost 1785 euros)Resources Cases This is a factual case. Researchers 7-7-2014 Serbia Honesty Peer review Corruption Nepotism Coercion Archives of Biological Sciences Publisher670 bytes (37 words) - 21:02, 26 May 2020
- Agriculture researcher up to 15 retractions for fake peer review (section Agriculture researcher up to 15 retractions for fake peer review)policy and set of guidelines on peer-reviewing. Some publishing bodies offer comprehensive sections on peer-reviewing ReserchersJournal editorsJournal1 KB (99 words) - 16:02, 21 June 2021
- open resource EditView sourceHistory Find out Resources Cases After a thorough investigation, the Publisher has concluded that the Editor was misled into832 bytes (82 words) - 16:22, 2 December 2021
- Peer review (section Peer review)sourceHistory Find out Resources Cases A professor tells a student that he is peer-reviewing the article of another research group, with whom you are in direct competition874 bytes (94 words) - 22:14, 27 April 2021
- Protecting peer review: Correspondence chronology and ethical analysis regarding logothetis vs. shmuel and leopold (section Protecting peer review: Correspondence chronology and ethical analysis regarding logothetis vs. shmuel and leopold)involved. Academic institutionsClinical researchersData protection officersPeer-reviewersJournal editors Nikos K. Logothetis Amir Shmuel David Leopold 20081 KB (142 words) - 16:26, 2 December 2021
- quality and transparency of the journal peer review system. For decades, several studies have suggested that the peer review system is slow, ineffective, inconsistent2 KB (259 words) - 15:36, 22 October 2021
- contribution was Oct 22, 2021 Education Open About Education Open About Peer review card game Curiosity Honesty Reliability Accountability Respect Research3 KB (383 words) - 14:23, 22 October 2021
- 'I am really sorry': Peer Reviewer Stole Text for Own Paper (section 'I am really sorry': Peer Reviewer Stole Text for Own Paper)manuscript under review ended up in the published review written by the peer reviewer and his colleague. The review was retracted, and the peer reviewer apologized1 KB (141 words) - 14:48, 19 August 2021
- by adding a statistical reviewer to the clinical peer review process. It showed evidence that peer review has a positive effect on the final quality of papers733 bytes (66 words) - 15:10, 27 October 2020
- Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project (section Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project)procedure Conflict of Interest Editorial review Good Practice Peer Review Peer review ethics violation Peer reviewing Publication Ethics Reusing Published4 KB (422 words) - 15:23, 19 October 2021
- access publishing platform. It provides post-publication peer review. Researchers Peer Review in the Social Sciences and Humanities327 bytes (30 words) - 13:41, 21 October 2020
- as the peer-review process is necessary. Sometimes, having an undisclosed interest could influence editorial decisions or hinder the proper review of manuscripts4 KB (479 words) - 17:32, 13 October 2020
- Open About Peer review COPE Present Accountability Objectivity Fairness Honesty Openness Availability Transparency Professionalism Peer Review Publication4 KB (438 words) - 13:06, 4 December 2020
- technology, and pedagogy. This journal has a three-stage peer review process. researchers Peer Review in the Social Sciences and Humanities440 bytes (41 words) - 13:30, 21 October 2020
- researchers is often equivalent to the production and acceptance of peer-reviewed manuscripts. In fact, the number of publications a researcher has is8 KB (1,039 words) - 18:49, 25 March 2021
- unrealistic promises regarding the speed of the peer review process (hinting that the journal's peer review process is minimal or non-existent)—or boasts9 KB (1,354 words) - 17:40, 26 March 2021
- and ways in which those disciplines are valuable to the society. Peer reviewers Peer Review in the Social Sciences and Humanities540 bytes (50 words) - 13:10, 21 October 2020
- energy healing methodology used. EditorsPeer reviewersResearchers Education Open About Post-publication peer review Replicability COPE Reliability Reproducability846 bytes (68 words) - 16:10, 18 June 2021
- post-publication peer-review and concerted efforts of responsible scientists. Journal editorsResearchers Post-publication peer review Selective citation998 bytes (84 words) - 12:47, 6 April 2021
- researcher is rejected for funding without deception. ResearchersFundersPeer reviewers Peer review Reliability Honesty Communication Research methods841 bytes (84 words) - 21:26, 22 October 2020
- data management, mentor and trainee roles, as well as authorship and peer review. The book ends with possible reasons and obstacles to responsible conduct1 KB (124 words) - 10:19, 13 May 2020
- Procrastinating Researcher Delegates Grant Reviews to Trainee (section Procrastinating Researcher Delegates Grant Reviews to Trainee)researchersFunders Cases Open About Fake peer-reviewing Peer review Reliability Accountability Funders' responsibilities Peer Review Mentor-trainee relationship875 bytes (61 words) - 13:56, 6 April 2021
- Practices and Responsible Authorship; Mentor/Trainee Responsibilities; Peer Review; Collaborative Science. Doctoral studentsEarly career researchersPhD StudentsResearch2 KB (133 words) - 20:36, 20 September 2020
- COPE seminar, webinar and ppt presentation (section 'I am really sorry': Peer Reviewer Stole Text for Own Paper)Inappropriate authorship Peer review card game Standards of authorship COPE Editorial Board Member for Research Integrity & Peer Review United Kingdom Publication1 KB (119 words) - 11:13, 28 October 2020
- Communicate results to the general public before a peer reviewed publication is available (section Communicate results to the general public before a peer reviewed publication is available)process of peer review involves a thorough evaluation of the research methodology and findings by experts or colleagues in the field (“peers”). The main9 KB (1,314 words) - 17:30, 27 October 2021
- four World Conferences on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1(1), p.17. Bouter, L.M., Tijdink, J., Axelsen, N., Martinson, B.C. and2 KB (310 words) - 15:28, 13 July 2021
- susceptible to fraud than other disciplines. They also evaluate whether the peer review process and replications work well in practice to detect fraud. This is1 KB (131 words) - 19:11, 25 October 2020
- four World Conferences on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review. 2016 Dec 1;1(1):17. An appropriate, transparent, and meticulous study3 KB (392 words) - 23:00, 27 October 2020
- basic principles and standards for all peer-reviewers. They can be applied across disciplines. Peer reviewers Peer Review in the Social Sciences and Humanities457 bytes (35 words) - 22:48, 24 October 2020
- relationship Data management Collaborative research Conflict of interest Peer review Moral reasoning Social responsibilities530 bytes (42 words) - 16:44, 13 March 2020
- research ENRIO Europe Authorship Plagiarism Mentor/trainee relationship Peer review Data management Conflict of interest Questionable research practice Research474 bytes (36 words) - 15:04, 26 May 2020
- concerns responsible authorship and peer review and raises questions on ethical challenges that both authors and peer reviewers often face. The quick guide622 bytes (61 words) - 13:41, 25 September 2020
- publishing monographs process: optional proposal, submission, internal review, peer review, copy editing, production and publication. One of the HIRMEOS objectives6 KB (746 words) - 10:05, 19 October 2021
- management Conflict of interest Financial responsibilities Whistleblowing Peer review Copyright738 bytes (71 words) - 13:17, 28 September 2020
- stakeholders in research COPE United Kingdom Authorship Publication ethics Peer review Conflict of interest Intellectual property Data management Allegations691 bytes (67 words) - 09:34, 27 May 2020
- researcher must face a review board when he has not finished his assignment. FundersSupervisorsReviewers Cases Open About Fake peer-reviewing Reliability Accountability567 bytes (34 words) - 14:19, 6 April 2021
- online archives or repositories that contain research papers before their peer review and publication. Their main aim is to accelerate dissemination process10 KB (1,346 words) - 11:20, 26 May 2021
- trainee relationship; publication practices and responsible authorship; peer review; collaborative science; research on humans; research on laboratory animals;2 KB (215 words) - 11:11, 28 October 2020
- four World Conferences on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1(1), p.17. Integrity in analysis and reporting of results is important4 KB (556 words) - 10:06, 28 October 2020
- sourceHistory Find out Resources Cases This is a factual case. Researchers Peer review Respect Accountability REC approval Informed consent Institutional Responsibilities524 bytes (26 words) - 18:57, 25 October 2020
- center 2015 United States Data management Research with Humans Authorship Peer review Grant applications Mentor/trainee relationship Research with Animals Biomedical761 bytes (68 words) - 14:48, 1 October 2020
- Hazardous substances Research with Humans Mentor/trainee relationship Peer review Data management Whistleblowing Biomedical sciences PE - Physical Sciences880 bytes (79 words) - 14:34, 1 October 2020
- Ethical decision making Authorship Research misconduct Whistleblowing Peer review Research with animals Intellectual property811 bytes (71 words) - 11:30, 9 November 2020
- United States honesty Reliability Mentor/trainee relationship Plagiarism Peer review Collaborative research Research with Humans Data management Social responsibilities916 bytes (78 words) - 13:04, 29 September 2020
- integrity trainers Queensland University of Technology OREI 2018 Australia Peer review Conflict of Interest Authorship Authorship and Contribution Public Communication937 bytes (88 words) - 15:57, 6 August 2020
- management Mentor/trainee relationship Publication ethics Authorship Peer review Collaborative research Research misconduct795 bytes (74 words) - 09:32, 22 September 2020
- academic publication: authorship and peer review The Integrity in academic publication: authorship and peer review course aims to stimulate PhD candidates3 KB (616 words) - 13:52, 15 February 2024
- Kim Wee Gunsalus et al. 2011 US Honesty Accountability FFP Authorship Peer review Research with humans Research with animals816 bytes (70 words) - 13:54, 5 November 2020
- with Humans Research with Animals Biosecurity Societal responsibilities Peer review Stem cell research Whistleblowing Mentoring Social responsibility Conflict870 bytes (83 words) - 13:31, 25 September 2020
- Reliability Accountability Conflict of interest Falsification Fabrication Peer review Clinical medicine675 bytes (49 words) - 15:55, 26 October 2020
- initiative to build a database of journal policies, focussing on open peer review, co-reviewing and detailed preprinting policies. The goal of this initiative993 bytes (112 words) - 20:36, 31 August 2020
- Interest data collection, storage and interpretation Plagiarism Authorship Peer Review LS 07.08 - Health services, health care research LS - Life Sciences PE1 KB (118 words) - 12:04, 2 October 2020
- Europe Reliability Honesty Respect Accountability Research misconduct Peer review Authorship Open access Fabrication Falsification Plagiarism Research with976 bytes (95 words) - 11:44, 25 September 2020
- misconduct Authorship Conflict of interest Data management Reproducability Peer review Intellectual property Allegations of misconduct1,020 bytes (112 words) - 17:23, 19 August 2021
- Brummel Gunsalus Anderson Loui 2010 US RCR Authorship Conflict of interest Peer review Interpersonal conflicts in mentoring Data management Whistleblowing Professional986 bytes (95 words) - 14:35, 27 October 2020
- Journal editors who oversaw decisions in which Monsanto manipulated the peer review process did not disclose their conflicts of interest. Scientific misconduct1 KB (116 words) - 16:52, 2 December 2021
- Methodology Research Records Authorship Open data Publication Acknowledgement Peer Review Conflict of Interest Public Communication Whistleblowing Responding to1 KB (107 words) - 12:25, 6 May 2020
- How to make the digital scholarly monograph fit for Open Access by applying smart services and toolsmonographs publishing. These are identification service, annotation service, peer-review certification system, metrics service and name entity recognition. ResearchersPhD790 bytes (56 words) - 13:16, 6 May 2021
- trainers Research integrity training for PhD students ORI 2002 United States Peer review Collaborative science Research involving animals Research misconduct Publication1 KB (108 words) - 14:05, 19 October 2020
- pressure to publish. It shows what can be achieved with post-publication peer-review. Furthermore, it shows what can go wrong when contributors who are responsible1 KB (105 words) - 20:07, 8 December 2020
- their real names in the past. The paper has gone through normal blind peer-review. It highlights that using pseudonyms affects the reliability of claims1,011 bytes (89 words) - 16:11, 18 June 2021
- storage and interpretation record-keeping Collaborative research Authorship Peer Review p Plagiarism Research Impact advocacy and dealing with media sharing SH1 KB (113 words) - 10:28, 11 August 2020
- a framework to support the integrity of the ARC’s grant application, peer review, grant selection and research evaluation processes, funding decisions2 KB (184 words) - 16:18, 21 October 2020
- misconduct Plagiarism Authorship Conflict of interest Publication ethics Peer review Copyright Collaborative research1 KB (102 words) - 14:57, 4 November 2020
- Replicability and replication in the humanities. Research Integrity and Peer Review. 2019;4(2):1-12. Britt Holbrook J, Penders B, de Rijcke S. The humanities6 KB (726 words) - 14:19, 21 April 2021
- Honesty Accountability Responsibility Transparency Publication Ethics Peer review Authorship Questionable Authorship Practices Authorship and Contribution1 KB (160 words) - 14:53, 10 August 2020
- studentsSupervisors Whistleblower protection/rights Conflict of interest in peer review Standards of authorship Confidentiality Monitoring funding processes Research2 KB (180 words) - 12:26, 19 October 2021
- this category. Biased peer-review is a well-known example of the detrimental effects of personal relationships because the peer review system is based on10 KB (1,482 words) - 16:11, 15 October 2021
- institutionsResearch funding organisations Funders Conflict of interest in peer review Conflict of interests Conflict of interest: a research integrity and research2 KB (274 words) - 15:52, 1 December 2022
- t staffsupervresearchers Authorship criteria Conflict of interest in peer review Conflict of interests Data Practices and Management FAIR principles: sharing2 KB (280 words) - 15:48, 10 June 2022
- practice Falsification Fabrication Plagiarism Social responsibilities Peer review Authorship1 KB (154 words) - 16:21, 21 October 2020
- Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project (section Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project)Publication Ethics Plagiarism Editorial review Complaints procedure Respect Peer Review Peer review Peer reviewing4 KB (408 words) - 15:22, 19 October 2021
- similarities. Altman LK. The Ingelfinger rule, embargoes, and journal peer review--Part 1. Lancet. 1996;347(9012):1382-6. Errami M, Sun Z, Long TC, George3 KB (420 words) - 11:45, 27 March 2021
- Conflicts of interest in the review of grant proposals (section Conflicts of interest in the review of grant proposals)this theme. Latest contribution was Oct 28, 2020 Conflict of interest in peer review Conflict of interests Honesty Conflict of interest Funders’ responsibilities3 KB (428 words) - 17:15, 28 October 2020