Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
Fuller, Steve
1991.
Peer review is not enough: Editors must work with librarians to ensure access to research.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
147.
Mahoney, Michael J.
1991.
Justice, efficiency and epistemology in the peer review of scientific manuscripts.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
157.
Gorman, Michael E.
1991.
Replication, reliability and peer review: A case study.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
149.
Cole, Stephen
1991.
Consensus and the reliability of peer-review evaluations.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
140.
Schönemann, Peter H.
1991.
In praise of randomness.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
162.
Eckberg, Douglas Lee
1991.
When nonreliability of reviews indicates solid science.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
145.
Colman, Andrew M.
1991.
Unreliable peer review: Causes and cures of human misery.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
141.
Cicchetti, Domenic V.
1991.
The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
119.
Armstrong, J. Scott
and
Hubbard, Raymond
1991.
Does the need for agreement among reviewers inhibit the publication controversial findings?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
136.
Roediger, Henry L.
1991.
Is unreliability in peer review harmful?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
159.
Gilmore, J. Barnard
1991.
On forecasting validity and finessing reliability.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
148.
Marsh, Herbert W.
and
Ball, Samuel
1991.
Reflections on the peer review process.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
157.
Crandall, Rick
1991.
What should be done improve reviewing?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
143.
Bailar, John C.
1991.
Reliability, fairness, objectivity and other inappropriate goals in peer review.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
137.
Greene, Richard
1991.
Is there an alternative to peer review?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
149.
Zentall, Thomas R.
1991.
What to do about peer review: Is the cure worse than the disease?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
166.
Stricker, Lawrence J.
1991.
Disagreement among journal reviewers: No cause for undue alarm.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
163.
Salzinger, Kurt
1991.
Now that we know how low the reliability is, what shall we do?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
162.
Kraemer, Helena Chmura
1991.
Do we really want more “reliable” reviewers?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
152.
Cone, John D.
1991.
Evaluating scholarly works: How many reviewers? How much anonymity?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
142.