Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
Boice, Robert
and
Jones, Ferdinand
1984.
Why Academicians Don't Write.
The Journal of Higher Education,
Vol. 55,
Issue. 5,
p.
567.
Winocur, Sharon
Schoen, Linda G.
and
Sirowatka, Astrid H.
1989.
Perceptions of male and female academics within a teaching context.
Research in Higher Education,
Vol. 30,
Issue. 3,
p.
317.
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.
Hargens, Lowell L.
1991.
Referee agreement in context.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
150.
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.
Yankauer, A
1991.
How blind is blind review?.
American Journal of Public Health,
Vol. 81,
Issue. 7,
p.
843.
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.
Lock, Stephen P.
1991.
Should the blinded lead the blinded?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
156.
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.
Wasserman, Gerald S.
1991.
Do peer reviewers really agree more on rejections than acceptances? A random-agreement benchmark says they do not.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
165.
Rourke, Byron P.
1991.
Toward openness and fairness in the review process.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
161.
Crandall, Rick
1991.
What should be done improve reviewing?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
143.
Cohen, Patricia
1991.
Does group discussion contribute reliability of complex judgments?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
139.
Adams, Kenneth M.
1991.
Peer review: An unflattering picture.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
135.
Kraemer, Helena Chmura
1991.
Do we really want more “reliable” reviewers?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
152.
Bornstein, Robert F.
1991.
The predictive validity of peer review: A neglected issue.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
138.
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.
Greene, Richard
1991.
Is there an alternative to peer review?.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
149.
Colman, Andrew M.
1991.
Unreliable peer review: Causes and cures of human misery.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 14,
Issue. 1,
p.
141.