USEFUL PUBLICATIONS FOR REVIEWERS

As a potential reviewer for the Journal of Social and Psychological Sciences you may want to consider reading             the following publications:

   The Task of the Referee (87 KB)

• Beyond Open Access: Open Discourse, the next great equalizer, (Retrovirology 2006, 3:55)

• "Measuring the quality of peer review" Journal of the American Medical Association 287: 2786–2790 (2002).

• Peer review – process, perspectives and the path ahead (J Postgrad Med 2001;47:210-4)

• Something Rotten at the Core of Science? (Analysis of US court decision of criteria for scientific evidence)

• Malice's Wonderland: Research Funding and Peer Review (Journal of Neurobiology 14, No. 2., pp. 95-112 (1983).

• Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? (Brain, Vol. 123, No. 9, 1964-1969, September 2000)

• Science and Politics: An Uneasy Mix (Reprinted from GSA Today, v. 14, no. 7 (July 2004)

• The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation (JAMA. 1990 March 9;263(10):1438-41. and comment JAMA. 1990 December 26;264(24):3143.)

• Suppressing Dissent in Science (Lancet Volume 357, Number 9257 3 March 2001)

• Hampering the progress of science by peer review and by the 'selective' funding system (Science Tribune - Article - December 1996 )

• Suppression of Dissent in Science (Research in Social Problems and Public Policy V. 7)

• Refereed Journals: Do They Insure Quality or Enforce Orthodoxy? Frank J. Tipler, and discussion board.

• The peer-review system: time for re-assessment? (Marine Ecology Progress Series)

• Philip E. Bourne, Alon Korngreen, "Ten Simple Rules for Reviewers", PLoS Computational Biology, 2(9):e110, 2006 September. General guidelines for reviewing.

• Stevan Harnad:

  • 1998: The Invisible Hand of Peer Review Nature version; Exploit Interactive version

  • 1997: Learned Inquiry and the Net: The Role of Peer Review, Peer Commentary and Copyright

  • (Learned Publishing 11(4) pp. 283-292.)

  • 1996: Implementing Peer Review on the Net: Scientific Quality Control in Scholarly Electronic Journals

  • (Peek, R. and Newby, G., Eds. , pp. 103-118. MIT Press.)

  • 1985: Rational disagreement in peer review (Science, Technology and Human Values 10 pp. 55-62.)

  • 1979: Creative disagreement (The Sciences 19 18 - 20.)

  • 1978 Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS) editorial