Source: https://t.co/4BuzlTy3Dn
"Very little is known about the effectiveness of various peer review procedures to detect erroneous or fraudulent research." https://t.co/kWblz2yS63
@ChairmanTmeow No it's not. Weaknesses are acknowledged and methods for improving the peer review system are under scrutiny. Nothing's perfect.🤷♀️ https://t.co/wPUfIONvfJ
The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications https://t.co/uW6Af1W30j
@ianfmusgrave @deralteGaukler @venkmurthy Guess it's an underresearched area... I know no guidelines, no toolkits, not even many publications* on fraud detection and retraction of papers. Maybe science is reluctant to research itself?! *here is one: https
RT @hispamed: Conoce más de las revisiones por iguales con este interesante artículo 👉https://t.co/hVi3mCLal8
RT @hispamed: Conoce más de las revisiones por iguales con este interesante artículo 👉https://t.co/hVi3mCLal8
RT @hispamed: The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications https://t.co/HfqOFPO4DG https://t.co/9FuTdy9…
The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications by S. P. J. M. Horbach & W. Halffman #OpenAccess @Springernomics #peerreview #academicpublishing #AcademicTwitter cc @RetractionWatch https://t.co/4vruM9tynP
RT @peterdalle: The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications https://t.co/syZ5R4I06O
RT @peterdalle: The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications https://t.co/syZ5R4I06O
RT @peterdalle: The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications https://t.co/syZ5R4I06O
The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications https://t.co/syZ5R4I06O
RT @RickyPo: The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications | SpringerLink https://t.co/7CPmYHhFOT
The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications https://t.co/3w33jpRBeW https://t.co/14Y0nKMSsr
The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications | SpringerLink https://t.co/7CPmYHhFOT
I will add "considerable conceptual caveats" to my review lexicon https://t.co/tusVgIQqTP
Which kind of peer review is best for catching fraudulent #research published in the scientific literature? What lessons can we learn? https://t.co/pTAVrQn97u Source manuscript https://t.co/49RgVQyQRE #fraud #conflict
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @OpenScienceR: The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications https://t.co/afT9exfSgO https://t.co/zkj…
👇🏻
RT @Protohedgehog: The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications - this looks like a really useful paper…
The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications https://t.co/afT9exfSgO https://t.co/zkjR77vty9
RT @Protohedgehog: The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications - this looks like a really useful paper…
Some interesting stuff here. "Journals taking novelty and anticipated impact into account when assessing manuscripts are indeed associated with more retractions". Also makes some claims about double-blind, though I'm less sure of this. https://t.co/AOhStzv
RT @Protohedgehog: The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications - this looks like a really useful paper…
The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications - this looks like a really useful paper filling an important knowledge gap https://t.co/yBuabg53gn @RetractionWatch
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @WillemHalffman: Which #peer_review procedures are related to more #retractions? Maybe some journals need to reconsider their review pro…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
Which #peer_review procedures are related to more #retractions? Maybe some journals need to reconsider their review procedures. Our paper, just out in Scientometrics, has some suggestions. https://t.co/7C3IFjBS7k
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @SLouhimies: Focus on #research #publication and integrity. Good read with conclusions highlighting again benefits of #RegisteredReports…
RT @SLouhimies: Focus on #research #publication and integrity. Good read with conclusions highlighting again benefits of #RegisteredReports…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
Cool. What about open peer reviews?
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @SLouhimies: Focus on #research #publication and integrity. Good read with conclusions highlighting again benefits of #RegisteredReports…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
Interesting overview of review practices but not sure if some conditional probabilities taken into account enough.
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
Focus on #research #publication and integrity. Good read with conclusions highlighting again benefits of #RegisteredReports @RegReports #3Rs
RT @JelteWicherts: Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well…
Study of peer review procedures used in 833K articles shows that not all approaches to peer review perform equally well in catching errors & misconduct https://t.co/2hSvfObO1Y https://t.co/Br5ESLmeQF