Open Peer Commentary
Referee agreement in context
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 150-151
-
- Article
- Export citation
Confusion between reviewer reliability and wise editorial and funding decisions
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 151-152
-
- Article
- Export citation
Do we really want more “reliable” reviewers?
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 152-154
-
- Article
- Export citation
Why is the reliability of peer review so low?
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 154-156
-
- Article
- Export citation
Should the blinded lead the blinded?
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 156-157
-
- Article
- Export citation
Justice, efficiency and epistemology in the peer review of scientific manuscripts
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, p. 157
-
- Article
- Export citation
Reflections on the peer review process
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 157-158
-
- Article
- Export citation
The process of peer review: Unanswered questions
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 158-159
-
- Article
- Export citation
Is unreliability in peer review harmful?
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 159-160
-
- Article
- Export citation
Some indices of the reliability of peer review
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 160-161
-
- Article
- Export citation
Toward openness and fairness in the review process
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, p. 161
-
- Article
- Export citation
Now that we know how low the reliability is, what shall we do?
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, p. 162
-
- Article
- Export citation
In praise of randomness
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 162-163
-
- Article
- Export citation
Disagreement among journal reviewers: No cause for undue alarm
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 163-164
-
- Article
- Export citation
Chairman's action: The importance of executive decisions in peer review
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 164-165
-
- Article
- Export citation
Do peer reviewers really agree more on rejections than acceptances? A random-agreement benchmark says they do not
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 165-166
-
- Article
- Export citation
What to do about peer review: Is the cure worse than the disease?
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 166-167
-
- Article
- Export citation
Author's Response
Reflections from the peer review mirror
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 167-186
-
- Article
- Export citation
Continuing Commentary
Dead men tell odd simple tales!
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 187-188
-
- Article
- Export citation
Reconciling Fechner and Stevens?
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2011, pp. 188-191
-
- Article
- Export citation