Description:This e-book focuses not only on how basic peer review works, but also on the problems and criteria of proper peer review. There are far more books on the basics of peer review, but in addition to these we wish to express more critical views of the scope and constitution of the peer-review system. We will therefore examine many different, general problems that peer review can have from different perspectives and voice our reasoning on behalf of open science. This means that our task is to understand constructive foundation for peer-review. We need clear division between superficial and scientific criteria that can affect the end result of peer review. The impact that we are trying to achieve with this writing is to present views on what is and is not necessary for scientific peer review. This effort has been made with writer, editor, and referee roles in mind to fully express the different dilemmas of each side on the matter. Therefore, our disposition on scientific writing can be named as open. This means that we as writers believe that it is within the interest of the scientific community to review scientific papers with solid counter arguments, clear ruling, without artificial demands, and in the end argue that half of the peer-review system’s task is to ensure not only if the paper is science or not but also that it will be the best version of itself through a constructive process. This typically means that journals have to state their rules and guidelines publicly and educate referees on how referring is done in a scientifically correct way. In the following chapters, there will be converse examples of good and bad practices of peer review in scientific journals. As writers of this book, we hope that readers will gain motivation as a referee and editor to conduct a proper peer-review process in an objective and non-superficial manner. For scientific writers, we want to express the complexity of each topic and the problem of scientific review, and also give guidelines for each case. Also, our focus in the case of writers is to formalise how writers can pick the right paper and thus save a lot of time and referee rounds for the writing. Therefore, the focus of this book is not to give a free pass on the peer-review process, but to examine what is necessary and what constitutes a superficial demand within the peer-review system. Through a holistic explanation of the peer-review system, these views and examples can be used in any scientific journal, peer-review process, and writing process associated with scientific writing.We have made it easy for you to find a PDF Ebooks without any digging. And by having access to our ebooks online or by storing it on your computer, you have convenient answers with Constructive scientific peer-review. To get started finding Constructive scientific peer-review, you are right to find our website which has a comprehensive collection of manuals listed. Our library is the biggest of these that have literally hundreds of thousands of different products represented.
Description: This e-book focuses not only on how basic peer review works, but also on the problems and criteria of proper peer review. There are far more books on the basics of peer review, but in addition to these we wish to express more critical views of the scope and constitution of the peer-review system. We will therefore examine many different, general problems that peer review can have from different perspectives and voice our reasoning on behalf of open science. This means that our task is to understand constructive foundation for peer-review. We need clear division between superficial and scientific criteria that can affect the end result of peer review. The impact that we are trying to achieve with this writing is to present views on what is and is not necessary for scientific peer review. This effort has been made with writer, editor, and referee roles in mind to fully express the different dilemmas of each side on the matter. Therefore, our disposition on scientific writing can be named as open. This means that we as writers believe that it is within the interest of the scientific community to review scientific papers with solid counter arguments, clear ruling, without artificial demands, and in the end argue that half of the peer-review system’s task is to ensure not only if the paper is science or not but also that it will be the best version of itself through a constructive process. This typically means that journals have to state their rules and guidelines publicly and educate referees on how referring is done in a scientifically correct way. In the following chapters, there will be converse examples of good and bad practices of peer review in scientific journals. As writers of this book, we hope that readers will gain motivation as a referee and editor to conduct a proper peer-review process in an objective and non-superficial manner. For scientific writers, we want to express the complexity of each topic and the problem of scientific review, and also give guidelines for each case. Also, our focus in the case of writers is to formalise how writers can pick the right paper and thus save a lot of time and referee rounds for the writing. Therefore, the focus of this book is not to give a free pass on the peer-review process, but to examine what is necessary and what constitutes a superficial demand within the peer-review system. Through a holistic explanation of the peer-review system, these views and examples can be used in any scientific journal, peer-review process, and writing process associated with scientific writing.We have made it easy for you to find a PDF Ebooks without any digging. And by having access to our ebooks online or by storing it on your computer, you have convenient answers with Constructive scientific peer-review. To get started finding Constructive scientific peer-review, you are right to find our website which has a comprehensive collection of manuals listed. Our library is the biggest of these that have literally hundreds of thousands of different products represented.