2013
DOI: 10.4103/0973-1229.109347 View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
|

Abstract: Science is strengthened not by research alone, but by publication of original research articles in international scientific journals that gets read by a global scientific community. Research publication is the ‘heart’ of a journal and the ‘soul’ of science - the outcome of collective efforts of authors, editors and reviewers. The publication process involves author-editor interaction for which both of them get credit once the article gets published – the author directly, the editor indirectly. However, the rem… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance
Select...
2
2
1
0
24
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An interesting idea is to create a reviewer index [26, 27] which would be an objective, transparent way of highlighting the important work carried out by reviewers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
Create an account to read the remaining citation statements from this report. You will also get access to:
  • Search over 1.2b+ citation statments to see what is being said about any topic in the research literature
  • Advanced Search to find publications that support or contrast your research
  • Citation reports and visualizations to easily see what publications are saying about each other
  • Browser extension to see Smart Citations wherever you read research
  • Dashboards to evaluate and keep track of groups of publications
  • Alerts to stay on top of citations as they happen
  • Automated reference checks to make sure you are citing reliable research in your manuscripts
  • 7 day free preview of our premium features.

Trusted by researchers and organizations around the world

Over 130,000 students researchers, and industry experts at use scite

See what students are saying

rupbmjkragerfmgwileyiopcupepmcmbcthiemesagefrontiersapsiucrarxivemeralduhksmucshluniversity-of-gavle
“…An interesting idea is to create a reviewer index [26, 27] which would be an objective, transparent way of highlighting the important work carried out by reviewers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
“…R -index places emphasis on the importance of review as part of any scientist's productivity. Unlike other proposed grading schemes [ 3 , 16 , 17 ], R -index not only recompenses reviewers proportionally to the quantity but also encompasses their time and effort invested and their standing in the field. Not all journals are equal, but not all reviewers are equal either.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
“…All evidence suggests review measurably improves the quality of published articles, usually filters out bad papers, and redirects good ones to more appropriate journals. However, the system is expensive for the journal and thankless for the unpaid reviewer: The aforementioned publish-or-perish culture does not value time spent reviewing [60]. Reviews are subject to confirmation bias, though this is not necessarily negative: Researchers have shown that this bias for positive results increases the content richness of the scientific record and makes meta-analyses more accurate [61,62].…”
Section: Conclusion: Causes and Preventative Strategiesmentioning
“…Online review is also subject to "herding", where scientists are unwilling to publicly disagree with the views of the majority or senior scientists [61,64]. A better solution is recognizing and rewarding quality reviewers as we do quality authors via a "Reviewer Index" [60].…”
Section: Conclusion: Causes and Preventative Strategiesmentioning