Modelling the effects of subjective and objective decision making in scientific peer review

No abstract is available for this paper.

• Publication year

  2013

• Venue

  Nature

• Publication date

  2013-12-04

• Fields of study

  Mathematics, Medicine, Psychology

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1038/nature12786PMID 24305052
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar, PubMed

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• A cross-sectional study

  2016cited by this paper
• Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience

  2013cited by this paper
• Deep impact: unintended consequences of journal rank

  2013cited by this paper
• The effect of the serotonin transporter polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) on amygdala function: a meta-analysis

  2013cited by this paper
• Faculty Opinions recommendation of Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience.

  2013cited by this paper
• Scientific inbreeding and same-team replication: type D personality as an example.

  2012cited by this paper
• Why Science Is Not Necessarily Self-Correcting

  2012cited by this paper
• False-Positive Psychology

  2011cited by this paper
• Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes.

  2010cited by this paper
• An Experiment on Prediction Markets in Science

  2009cited by this paper
• Large-Scale Assessment of the Effect of Popularity on the Reliability of Research

  2009cited by this paper
• How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network

  2009cited by this paper
• Persistence of contradicted claims in the literature.

  2007cited by this paper
• You have printed the following article : A Theory of Fads , Fashion , Custom , and Cultural Change as Informational Cascades

  2007cited by this paper
• Believability of relative risks and odds ratios in abstracts: cross sectional study

  2006cited by this paper
• Scientists behaving badly

  2005cited by this paper
• Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research.

  2005influential reference
• Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

  2005influential reference
• Cross-Sectional Study

  2005cited by this paper
• Biopsychosocial Medicine: An Integrated Approach to Understanding Illness

  2005cited by this paper
• Early extreme contradictory estimates may appear in published research: the Proteus phenomenon in molecular genetics research and randomized trials.

  2005cited by this paper
• An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances

  2003cited by this paper
• The Data Detective

  2002cited by this paper
• A Simple Model of Herd Behavior

  1992cited by this paper
• More on the too-good-to-be-true paradox and Gregor Mendel

  1986cited by this paper
• Probability and Measure

  1980cited by this paper
• The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results

  1979cited by this paper
• Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis

  1974cited by this paper
• The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

  1964cited by this paper
• Publication Decisions and their Possible Effects on Inferences Drawn from Tests of Significance—or Vice Versa

  1959cited by this paper
• Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority.

  1956cited by this paper

• Automatically investigating scientific discussions in peer review reports based on conformity score metrics

  2026cites this paper
• Are scientific assessments and academic culture impeding transformative science?

  2025cites this paper
• Streamlining the self-correction process: a review of the use of replication research by organizational scholars

  2024cites this paper
• Science and opinion in decision making: A case study of the food security collapse in Sri Lanka

  2023cites this paper
• Study results from journals with a higher impact factor are closer to “truth”: a meta-epidemiological study

  2023cites this paper
• ChatGPT identifies gender disparities in scientific peer review

  2023cites this paper
• Reporting of Artificial Intelligence Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Pathology Abstracts: Compliance with STARD for Abstracts Guidelines

  2022cites this paper
• Herding in Probabilistic Forecasts

  2022cites this paper
• Inactivating Amplified HER2: Challenges, Dilemmas, and Future Directions

  2022cites this paper
• Comparing paper level classifications across different methods and systems: an investigation of Nature publications

  2022cites this paper
• Influence of Author's Gender on the Peer-Review Process in Vision Science.

  2022cites this paper
• Peer review analyze: A novel benchmark resource for computational analysis of peer reviews

  2022cites this paper
• Dynamic patterns of open review process

  2021cites this paper
• Objectivity of the peer‐review process: Enduring myth, reality, and possible remedies

  2021cites this paper
• The Association Between The Impact Factor of A Journal And The Trueness of Findings Published Therein: A Meta-Epidemiological Study

  2021cites this paper
• The quality of systematic reviews/meta‐analyses published in the field of bariatrics: A cross‐sectional systematic survey using AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS

  2020cites this paper
• Maschinen zur Lösung der grossen Probleme – Ein formeller Rahmen

  2020cites this paper
• Herding in Probabilistic Forecasts

  2020cites this paper
• Motivations for performing scholarly prepublication peer review: A scoping review

  2020cites this paper
• Enabling Corporate Sustainability from a Talent Acquisition Perspective

  2020cites this paper
• The analysis of living systems can generate both knowledge and illusions

  2020cites this paper
• Evolving Document Patterns in UK Research Assessment Cycles

  2020cites this paper
• Conflicts of Interest in Neurosurgical Innovation

  2019cites this paper
• Why can't we make research grant allocation systems more consistent? A personal opinion

  2019cites this paper
• Effects of seniority, gender and geography on the bibliometric output and collaboration networks of European Research Council (ERC) grant recipients

  2019cites this paper
• Ethics of Innovation in Neurosurgery

  2019cites this paper
• 1 | THE PAR ADOX: HIGH RESE ARCH QUALIT Y BUT LOW POWER IN JUDGING REL ATIVE MERIT

  2019cites this paper
• Risky Business: A Comparative Analysis of Risk Instruments of Sports Security Arenas

  2019cites this paper
• A modelling odyssey in the tree of life

  2019cites this paper
• Adherence to reporting guidelines increases the number of citations: the argument for including a methodologist in the editorial process and peer-review

  2019cites this paper
• The fame monster: Unintended consequence of fame for psychological science

  2019cites this paper
• Judging research papers for research excellence

  2018cites this paper
• Zur Lösung der wirklich bedeutenden Probleme: Was von Maschinen erwartet wird

  2018cites this paper
• A Survey on Data Reproducibility and the Effect of Publication Process on the Ethical Reporting of Laboratory Research

  2018cites this paper
• The impact of conference ranking systems in computer science: a comparative regression analysis

  2018cites this paper
• Oversight and Ethical Regulation of Conflicts of Interest in Neurosurgery in the United States

  2018cites this paper
• An agent-based simulation model to analyze journal impact factor

  2018cites this paper
• A theory and methodology to quantify knowledge

  2018cites this paper
• Open Science: A Review on Open Peer Review Literature

  2018cites this paper
• Teachers and 1:1 technology in classroom activities: A quantitative study comparing perceptions and stage of adoption

  2018cites this paper
• Analysis of Determinants of Methodology to be Employed in Planning Public Participation in Kenya: A Case of Bomet County.

  2018cites this paper
• A brief tribute to slowness in science

  2018cites this paper
• How prevalent is academic misconduct in management Research

  2017cites this paper
• Does Peer Review Identify the Best Papers? A Simulation Study of Editors, Reviewers, and the Scientific Publication Process

  2017cites this paper
• Excelência na ciência: uma reflexão crítica afirmativa

  2017cites this paper
• Improving the Efficiency of Grant and Journal Peer Review: Registered Reports Funding.

  2017cites this paper
• What Crisis? Taking Stock of Management Researchers Experiences with and Views of Scholarly Misconduct

  2017cites this paper
• EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE: A CRITICAL AFFIRMATIVE RESPONSE

  2017cites this paper
• Potential Financial Conflict of Interest Among Physician Editorial Board Members of Orthopaedic Surgery Journals

  2017cites this paper
• Promoting reproducibility in addiction research.

  2017cites this paper
• the Orthopaedic forum Potential Financial Con fl ict of Interest Among Physician Editorial Board Members of Orthopaedic Surgery Journals

  2017cites this paper
• A manifesto for reproducible science

  2017cites this paper
• Overstatements in abstract conclusions claiming effectiveness of interventions in psychiatry: A meta-epidemiological investigation

  2017cites this paper
• The credibility crisis in research: Can economics tools help?

  2017cites this paper
• Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective

  2017cites this paper
• Evaluating alternative systems of peer review: a large-scale agent-based modelling approach to scientific publication

  2017cites this paper
• An appealing prospect? A survey into the numbers, outcomes, and editorial policies for appeals of rejected biomedical manuscripts

  2017cites this paper
• A Distributed Parallel Model to Analyze Journal Impact Factors

  2017cites this paper
• Social tipping points in global groundwater management

  2017cites this paper
• The Research Reproducibility Crisis and Economics of Science

  2017cites this paper
• Peer review: from recognition to improved practices.

  2016cites this paper
• How We Teach : Generalizable Education Research Doing peer review and receiving feedback : impact on scientific literacy and writing skills

  2016cites this paper
• Foucault, the “Facts,” and the Fiction of Neutrality: Neutrality in Librarianship and Peer Review

  2016cites this paper
• scientific literacy and writing skills Doing peer review and receiving feedback: impact on

  2016cites this paper
• Citation bias and selective focus on positive findings in the literature on the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR), life

  2016cites this paper
• Doing peer review and receiving feedback: impact on scientific literacy and writing skills.

  2016cites this paper
• Why Submit Your Next Paper to the “ Japanese Journal of Personality ”?

  2016cites this paper
• The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise

  2016cites this paper
• Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness (CERTAIN): evolution of a content management system for point-of-care clinical decision support

  2016cites this paper
• Citation bias and selective focus on positive findings in the literature on the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR), life stress and depression

  2016cites this paper
• Ardeola, a Scientific Journal of Ornithology: Cooperative Survivorship within the Red Queen Game

  2016cites this paper
• Impact of medical academic genealogy on publication patterns: An analysis of the literature for surgical resection in brain tumor patients

  2016cites this paper
• Navigating conflicts of interest in a rapidly changing research landscape.

  2016cites this paper
• (2016). Navigating conflicts of interest in a rapidly changing research landscape. Addiction , 111 (8), 1333-1334.

  2016cites this paper
• UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) A manifesto for reproducible science

  2016cites this paper
• How peer-review constrains cognition: on the frontline in the knowledge sector

  2015cites this paper
• Citation Distortions in the Literature on the Serotonin-Transporter-Linked Polymorphic Region and Amygdala Activation.

  2015cites this paper
• Do men and women perform academic work differently

  2015cites this paper
• The big consequences of small biases: A simulation of peer review

  2015cites this paper
• Psychological process models and aggregate behavior

  2015cites this paper
• Psychological Process Models and Aggregate Behavior

  2015cites this paper
• Use of double‐blind peer review to increase author diversity

  2015cites this paper
• A new editor-in-chief for Nicotine & Tobacco Research.

  2015cites this paper
• Peer Review: Through the Looking Glass.

  2015cites this paper
• Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations

  2015cites this paper
• Can animal data translate to innovations necessary for a new era of patient-centred and individualised healthcare? Bias in preclinical animal research

  2015cites this paper
• Complex systems approach to scientific publication and peer-review system: development of an agent-based model calibrated with empirical journal data

  2015cites this paper
• Potential Conflicts of Interest of Editorial Board Members from Five Leading Spine Journals

  2015cites this paper
• The collective dynamics of sequential search in markets for cultural products

  2015cites this paper
• Using prediction markets to estimate the reproducibility of scientific research

  2015cites this paper
• Mistake index as a surrogate of quality in scientific manuscripts

  2015cites this paper
• On Disciplinary Fragmentation and Scientific Progress

  2015cites this paper
• Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors

  2015cites this paper
• Innovation Suppression and Clique Evolution in Peer-Review-Based, Competitive Research Funding Systems: An Agent-Based Model

  2015cites this paper
• Editorial Misconduct - Definition, Cases, and Causes

  2014cites this paper
• Investigating journal peer review as scientific object of study

  2014cites this paper
• Errors in science : the role o

  2014cites this paper
• Errors in science: the role of reviewers.

  2014cites this paper
• Filling the Gap

  2014cites this paper
• Design and Assessment of an Assignment-Based Curriculum to Teach Scientific Writing and Scientific Peer Review.

  2014cites this paper