| Homepage |
| Search |
An observational study of discussions that took place during manuscript meetings at JAMA, aimed at exploring the words and phrases used by a group of editors during their meetings. A schema for classifying the phrases used by editors was developed by using an interactive approach. The authors concluded that the classification of editorial discourses provides an insight into editorial decision making and warrants further exploration. Ware M. Peer review: benefits, perceptions and alternatives. London: Publishing Research Consortium, 2008. (www.publishingresearch.net/documents/PRCsummary4Warefinal.pdf) The Publishing Research Consortium is a group of associations and publishers that supports global research into scholarly communication to enable evidence-based discussion. Its survey shows that peer review is widely supported by academics (93%); they believe that it improves the quality of published papers, yet there is a desire for improvement, and double-blind review is generally preferred. Post-publication review is seen as a useful supplement to formal peer review. Most reviewers (90%) are also authors. © Copyright 2008 by European Association of Science Editors Top of Page |
|
|