Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

PUBLISHING IN PEER-REVIEWED JOURNALS AS THE MAJOR MECHANISM FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE

PUBLISHING IN PEER-REVIEWED JOURNALS AS THE MAJOR MECHANISM FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF SCIENTIFIC... Gami et al. observe that author self-citations may misrepresent the importance of individual articles, skew the calculation of journal impact factors and bias perceptions of the importance of a publication. Kurmis contend that direct comparison between journals on the basis of the total number of citations alone is influenced by a number of factors, such as journal format and content, appropriateness of article classification, and discipline-specific citation tendencies. Pöschl and Koop point out that collaborative peer review facilitates and enhances quality assurance. Grazia Ietto-Gillies observes that we need a system for evaluating the worth of a work and for assessing whether it is good enough to be put into the public domain. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Review of Contemporary Philosophy Addleton Academic Publishers

PUBLISHING IN PEER-REVIEWED JOURNALS AS THE MAJOR MECHANISM FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE

Review of Contemporary Philosophy , Volume 8 (1): 124-128 – Jan 1, 2009

Loading next page...
 
/lp/addleton-academic-publishers/publishing-in-peer-reviewed-journals-as-the-major-mechanism-for-the-vs8AhhQhLj
Publisher
Addleton Academic Publishers
Copyright
© 2009 Addleton Academic Publishers
ISSN
1841-5261
eISSN
2471-089X
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Gami et al. observe that author self-citations may misrepresent the importance of individual articles, skew the calculation of journal impact factors and bias perceptions of the importance of a publication. Kurmis contend that direct comparison between journals on the basis of the total number of citations alone is influenced by a number of factors, such as journal format and content, appropriateness of article classification, and discipline-specific citation tendencies. Pöschl and Koop point out that collaborative peer review facilitates and enhances quality assurance. Grazia Ietto-Gillies observes that we need a system for evaluating the worth of a work and for assessing whether it is good enough to be put into the public domain.

Journal

Review of Contemporary PhilosophyAddleton Academic Publishers

Published: Jan 1, 2009

There are no references for this article.