Se buscan revisoras/es

Ab-Rahman, M. S., Zain, S. M., Nor, M. J. M., Ihsan, A. K. A. M., Zaharim, A., Sukarna, M. F., & Hipni, A. (2015). Achieving quality in research through stimulated publication technique. Asian Social Science, 11(3), 14-25. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n3p14

Armstrong, J.S. (1997) Peer review for journals: Evidence on quality control fairness, and innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3(1),63-84. https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs11948-997-0017-3.

August, E. T., & Brouwer, A. F. (2024). How to write an effective journal peer review using a staged writing approach: a best-practice guide for early-career researchers. International Journal of Epidemiology, 53(6), dyae154. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyae154

Benos, D.J., Bashari, E., Chaves, J.M., Gaggar, A., Kapoor, N., LaFrance, M., Mans, R., Mayhew, D., McGowan, S., Polter, A., Quadri, Y., Sarfare, S., Schultz, K., Splittgerber, R., Stephenson, J., Tower, C., Walton, R. G., & Zotov, A. (2007). The ups and down of peer review. Advances in Physiology Education, 31(2), 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00104.2006

Borja, A., & Elliott, M. (2024). Do you want your paper published?–Then referee others! The view from seasoned editors. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 310, 109006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2024.109006

Burmeister, O. K. (2015). Improving professional IT doctorate completion rates. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 19. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v19i0.1073

Burnham, J.C. (1990). The evolution of editorial peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263(10), 1323-1329. https://doi.org/10.1001/JAMA.1990.03440100023003

Cooke, S. J., Young, N., Peiman, K. S., Roche, D. G., Clements, J. C., Kadykalo, A. N., Provencher, J.F., Rahavaan, R., DeRosa, M.C., Lenox, R.J., Robinson Fayek, A., Cristescu, M. E., Murray, S.J., Quinn, J., Cobey, K.D., & Browman, H. I. (2024). A harm reduction approach to improving peer review by acknowledging its imperfections. FACETS, 9(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2024-0102

Farias, M. G. G., & Santos, G. C. (2023). Evaluations of scientific productions: challenges and motivations of editors and reviewers. Encontros Bibli, 28, e92858. https://doi.org/10.5007/1518-2924.2023.e92858/54023

Fiialka, S., Trishchuk, O., & Figol, N. (2020). Reviewing articles as a way of professional evaluation of scientific texts: organizational and ethical aspects. Knowledge and Performance Management, 4, 26-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/kpm.04(1).2020.03

Fitzpatrick, K. (2009). Planned obsolescence: Publishing, technology, and the future of the academy. NYU Press.

Garbati, J., & Brockett, E. (2018). Students speak out: The impact of participation in an undergraduate research journal. Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie, 28, 227-245. https://doi.org/10.31468/cjsdwr.618

Guida, G. (2018). An analysis of scientific research performance in Italy: evaluation criteria and public funding. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 10(7), 1-45. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v10n7p45

Gupta, V. K. (2017). Quality control through peer review process in scholarly communication: Review of related literature. IRA-International Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 8(3), 248-255. https://doi.org/10.21013/jmss.v8.n3.p3

Helmer, S., Blumenthal, D. B., & Paschen, K. (2020). What is meaningful research and how should we measure it?. Scientometrics, 125(1), 153-169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03649-5

Kovanis, M., Porcher, R., Ravaud, P., & Trinquart, L. (2016). The global burden of journal peer review in the biomedical literature: Strong imbalance in the collective enterprise. PloS one, 11(11), e0166387. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166387

Kravitz, R. L., Franks, P., Feldman, M. D., Gerrity, M., Byrne, C., & Tierney, W. M. (2010). Editorial peer reviewers’ recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care? PloS one, 5(4), e10072. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010072

Kronick, D. A. (1990). Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263(10), 1321–1322. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1990.03440100021002

Levkoe, C. Z., Schembri, V., & Wilson, A. D. (2019). Community-Academic Peer Review: Prospects for Strengthening Community-Campus Engagement and Enriching Scholarship. Engaged Scholar Journal: Community-Engaged Research, Teaching, and Learning, 4(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.15402/esj.v4i2.61745

Marcoci, A., Vercammen, A., Bush, M., Hamilton, D. G., Hanea, A., Hemming, V., ... & Fidler, F. (2022). Reimagining peer review as an expert elicitation process. BMC Research Notes, 15(1), 127. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-022-06016-0

Mbuagbaw, L., Morfaw, F., Kunda, J. E. L., Mukonzo, J. K., Kastner, J., Zhang, S., Kokolo, M. & Thabane, L. (2013). Tips for charting the course of a successful health research career. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 163-168. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S44738

McNair, R., Le Phuong, H. A., Cseri, L., & Szekely, G. (2019). Peer Review of Manuscripts: A Valuable yet Neglected Educational Tool for Early‐Career Researchers. Education Research International, 2019(1), 1359362. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1359362

Patel, J. (2014). Why training and specialization is needed for peer review: a case study of peer review for randomized controlled trials. BMC Medicine, 12: 128. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-014-0128-z

Ross-Hellauer, T. (2017). What is open peer review? A systematic review, 6, 588. https://doi.org/10.12688%2Ff1000research.11369.1

Ross-Hellauer, T., Deppe, A., & Schmidt, B. (2017). Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers. PloS one, 12(12), e0189311. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189311

Waltman, L., Kaltenbrunner, W., Pinfield, S., & Woods, H. B. (2023). How to improve scientific peer review: Four schools of thought. Learned Publishing, 36(3), 334-347. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1544