Matches in Nanopublications for { <https://w3id.org/np/RA39-hHHPjBx9RnxX1PjGHrdyZRnDM1FXBh2Ys4cvY1CU#assertion> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 14 of
14
with 100 items per page.
- assertion comment " "Peer review...for centuries the standard tool to determine an academic paper’s suitability for publication". https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-02943-z?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&error=cookies_not_supported&code=3aece27d-b313-46e1-bcf1-1ecf2c746579 No. The term is only a few decades old and Nature itself didn't it routinely until the 1970s. 1/3 More on the history of peer review here and refs within https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002234 2/3 That said, lots to agree with in the statement that "unprofessional peer review is that which is unethical, irrelevant, mean-spirited or cruel and lacking constructive criticism". Lot of that about in both formal and informal peer review.. 3/3 " assertion.
- assertion wasAttributedTo RAC2Mu-sYIZ95E5N8CONhslCWaNKjPqBVgc6DLeK--wHU provenance.
- assertion wasAttributedTo 0000-0001-6478-931X provenance.
- assertion creator RAC2Mu-sYIZ95E5N8CONhslCWaNKjPqBVgc6DLeK--wHU assertion.
- assertion wasGeneratedBy activity provenance.
- assertion wasAssociatedWith cshperspectives provenance.
- assertion disagreesWith d41586-024-02943-z?utm_medium=twitter assertion.
- assertion discusses journal.pbio.3002234 assertion.
- assertion keywords "ethics" assertion.
- assertion keywords "academic-publishing" assertion.
- assertion keywords "peer-review" assertion.
- assertion keywords "courtesy" assertion.
- assertion keywords "history-of-science" assertion.
- assertion linksTo 1838349731916898719 provenance.