Advances in peer review research: an introduction

Peer review is a topic of considerable concern to many researchers, and there is a correspondingly large body of research on the topic. This issue of Science and Engineering Ethics presents recent work on peer review that is both grounded in empirical science and is applicable to policy decisions. This research raises two basic questions; (a) how does current peer review operate, and (b) how can it be improved? Topics addressed include descriptions of how peer review is used in Federal agencies. whether peer review leads to better manuscripts, demographic characteristics of authors or reviewers (status or institutional affiliation), blinding of reviewers, authors, or results, reliability and consistency of reviews, accepting a paper before the study is done, simultaneous submission, and use of dispute resolution procedures such as scientific dialectical and pleading protocols.

[1]  Hans-Dieter Daniel,et al.  Guardians of Science: Fairness and Reliability of Peer Review , 1994 .

[2]  D. Chubin,et al.  Peerless Science: Peer Review and U. S. Science Policy , 1990 .

[3]  Peter J. Frost,et al.  Publishing in the Organizational Sciences , 1985 .

[4]  Jill Lambert Scientific and technical journals , 1985 .

[5]  Bruce W. Speck Publication Peer Review: An Annotated Bibliography , 1993 .

[6]  Ronald N. Kostoff,et al.  Assessing Research Impact , 1994 .

[7]  D. Rennie,et al.  The Second International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. , 1994, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

[8]  Daryl E. Chubin,et al.  Peer Review and Public Policy , 1985 .

[9]  R. Merton,et al.  Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalisation, structure and functions of the referee system , 1971 .

[10]  Lowell L. Hargens,et al.  Scholarly Consensus and Journal Rejection Rates. , 1988 .

[11]  D. Lindsey The Scientific Publication System In Social Science , 1978 .

[12]  S. Ceci,et al.  Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again , 1982, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[13]  L. Hargens,et al.  Variation in journal peer review systems. Possible causes and consequences. , 1990, JAMA.

[14]  J. Duderstadt Allocating Federal Funds for Science and technology , 1995 .

[15]  Kenneth J. Arrow,et al.  Rejected : leading economists ponder the publication process , 1995 .

[16]  D. Cicchetti The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation , 1991, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.