Matches in Nanopublications for { ?s ?p " "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 " ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 1 of
1
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.