The ups and downs of peer review
AJP Advances in Physiology Education2007Vol. 31(2), pp. 145–152
Citations Over TimeTop 1% of 2007 papers
Dale Benos, Edlira Bashari, J. M. Chaves, Amit Gaggar, Niren Kapoor, Martin W. LaFrance, Robert Mans, David L. Mayhew, Sara L McGowan, Abigail M. Polter, Yawar J. Qadri, Shanta Sarfare, Kevin T. Schultz, Ryan Splittgerber, Jason Stephenson, Cristy Tower-Gilchrist, R. Grace Walton, Alexander Zotov
Abstract
This article traces the history of peer review of scientific publications, plotting the development of the process from its inception to its present-day application. We discuss the merits of peer review and its weaknesses, both perceived and real, as well as the practicalities of several major proposed changes to the system. It is our hope that readers will gain a better appreciation of the complexities of the process and, when serving as reviewers themselves, will do so in a manner that will enhance the utility of the exercise. We also propose the development of an international on-line training program for accreditation of potential referees.
Related Papers
- → Peer review in a changing world: An international study measuring the attitudes of researchers(2012)396 cited
- → Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals(2012)44 cited
- → Peer Review(2017)12 cited
- → Research Methods: How to Perform an Effective Peer Review(2022)12 cited
- → The Peer Review Process(2008)10 cited