Research on Research, Policy & Culture

Research on Research, Policy & Culture

Scholarly Publishing & Peer Review

track_changes Track Tracking Be alerted when new articles are added in this gateway (manage your tracking alerts via your account) Stop tracking this gateway
Home Gateways Research on Research, Policy & Culture
81-98 of 98 ARTICLES
Previous Next
 in 
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.8229.1
Editorial metrics NOT PEER REVIEWED
Should there be greater use of preprint servers for publishing reports of biomedical science?
[version 1; peer review: not peer reviewed]
Iain Chalmers, Paul P Glasziou
PUBLISHED 03 Mar 2016
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7968.1
Opinion Article metrics
Towards an open science publishing platform
[version 1; peer review: 2 approved]
Vitek Tracz, Rebecca Lawrence
Peer Reviewers Johanna R. McEntyre; Gary G Borisy
PUBLISHED 03 Feb 2016
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7460.1
Editorial metrics NOT PEER REVIEWED
On the evolving open peer review culture for chemical information science
[version 1; peer review: not peer reviewed]
W. Patrick Walters, Jürgen Bajorath
PUBLISHED 25 Nov 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6555.2
Research Article metrics
Revised
The Resource Identification Initiative: A cultural shift in publishing
[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
Anita Bandrowski, Matthew Brush, Jeffery S. Grethe, Melissa A. Haendel, David N. Kennedy, Sean Hill, Patrick R. Hof, Maryann E. Martone, Maaike Pols, Serena Tan, Nicole Washington, Elena Zudilova-Seinstra, Nicole Vasilevsky, Resource Identification Initiative Members are listed here: https://www.force11.org/node/4463/members
Peer Reviewers Randi Vita; William Gunn
LATEST VERSION PUBLISHED 19 Nov 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6742.1
Editorial metrics NOT PEER REVIEWED
Single Figure Publications: Towards a novel alternative format for scholarly communication
[version 1; peer review: not peer reviewed]
Long Do, William Mobley
PUBLISHED 17 Jul 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6478.1
Research Article metrics
Journal ratings as predictors of articles quality in Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences: an analysis based on the Italian Research Evaluation Exercise
[version 1; peer review: 3 approved]
Andrea Bonaccorsi, Tindaro Cicero, Antonio Ferrara, Marco Malgarini
Peer Reviewers Geoffrey Williams; Alesia Zuccala; Chiara Faggiolani and Domenica Fioredistella Iezzi
PUBLISHED 07 Jul 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6502.1
Software Tool Article metrics
Connecting the pieces: Using ORCIDs to improve research impact and repositories
[version 1; peer review: 2 approved]
Mohamed Baessa, Thibaut Lery, Daryl Grenz, J. K. Vijayakumar
Peer Reviewers Sarah L. Shreeves; Antonella De Robbio
PUBLISHED 07 Jul 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6506.1
Opinion Article metrics
Problematizing Digital Research Evaluation using DOIs in Practice-Based Arts, Humanities and Social Science Research
[version 1; peer review: 2 approved]
Muriel Swijghuisen Reigersberg
Peer Reviewers Anne Galliot; Ben Johnson
PUBLISHED 07 Jul 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6517.1
Opinion Article metrics
Connecting Altmetric: Integrating with Institutional Publications Systems
[version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]
Natalia Madjarevic
Peer Reviewers John Dupuis; Philip Young
PUBLISHED 07 Jul 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6499.1
Software Tool Article metrics
An ORCID based synchronization framework for a national CRIS ecosystem
[version 1; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]
João Mendes Moreira, Alcino Cunha, Nuno Macedo
Peer Reviewers Mikael K. Elbaek; Keith G. Jeffery; Simeon Warner
PUBLISHED 06 Jul 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6504.1
Opinion Article metrics
ORCID for funders: Who’s who - and what are they doing? - ORCID IDs as identifiers for researchers and flexible article based classifications to understand the collective researcher portfolio
[version 1; peer review: 1 not approved]
Christian Herzog, Giles Radford
Peer Reviewers Johanna R. McEntyre
PUBLISHED 20 May 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6488.1
Editorial metrics NOT PEER REVIEWED
The five deadly sins of science publishing
[version 1; peer review: not peer reviewed]
Vitek Tracz
PUBLISHED 11 May 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.5878.2
Opinion Article metrics
Revised
Shaping the Future of Research: a perspective from junior scientists
[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
Gary S. McDowell, Kearney T. W. Gunsalus, Drew C. MacKellar, Sarah A. Mazzilli, Vaibhav P. Pai, Patricia R. Goodwin, Erica M. Walsh, Avi Robinson-Mosher, Thomas A. Bowman, James Kraemer, Marcella L. Erb, Eldi Schoenfeld, Leila Shokri, Jonathan D. Jackson, Ayesha Islam, Matthew D. Mattozzi, Kristin A. Krukenberg, Jessica K. Polka
Peer Reviewers Paula E Stephan; Kenneth D. Gibbs Jr.
LATEST VERSION PUBLISHED 09 Jan 2015
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3979.3
Review metrics
Revised
Data publication consensus and controversies
[version 3; peer review: 3 approved]
John Kratz, Carly Strasser
Peer Reviewers Mark Parsons and Peter Fox; Mark Costello; Ingrid Dillo
LATEST VERSION PUBLISHED 16 Oct 2014
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3714.1
Opinion Article metrics
New forms of checks and balances are needed to improve research integrity
[version 1; peer review: 2 approved, 1 not approved]
Elizabeth Iorns, Christin Chong
Peer Reviewers Andrew D. Chalmers; Ivan Oransky; David Soll
PUBLISHED 28 May 2014
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-17.v1
Correspondence metrics
Authors are also reviewers: problems in assigning cause for missing negative studies
[version 1; peer review: 4 approved]
Stephen Senn
Peer Reviewers Paul Silcocks; Steff Lewis; James Matcham; Sara Hughes
PUBLISHED 21 Jan 2013
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-1.v1
Correspondence metrics
Biased under-reporting of research reflects biased under-submission more than biased editorial rejection
[version 1; peer review: 3 approved]
Iain Chalmers, Kay Dickersin
Peer Reviewers Riekie de Vet; Luigi Naldi; Steven Julious
PUBLISHED 02 Jan 2013
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.1-59.v1
Opinion Article metrics
Misunderstanding publication bias: editors are not blameless after all
[version 1; peer review: 2 approved]
Stephen Senn
Peer Reviewers James Roger; Vance Berger
PUBLISHED 04 Dec 2012
81-98 of 98 ARTICLES
Previous Next
Gateway Areas
Call for Papers: AI in Academic Research open_in_new
Our Links
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.