[1] |
罗伯特·默顿. 科学社会学[M]. 鲁旭东,林聚任. 译. 北京:商务印书馆, 2017.
|
[2] |
Bush V. 科学——没有止境的前沿[M]. 范岱年,解道华. 译. 北京:商务印书馆, 2004.
|
[3] |
龚旭 . 科学政策与同行评议——中美科学制度与政策比较研究[M]. 杭州: 浙江大学出版社, 2009.
|
[4] |
Kuhn T S. 科学革命的结构[M]. 李宝恒, 纪树立. 译. 上海:上海科学技术出版社, 1980.
|
[5] |
Barnes B. 科学知识与社会学理论[M]. 鲁旭东. 译. 北京: 东方出版社, 2001.
|
[6] |
Latour B. 科学在行动:怎样在社会中跟随科学家和工程师[M]. 刘文旋, 郑开. 译. 北京:东方出版社, 2005.
|
[7] |
Knorr-Cetina K D. 制造知识:建构主义与科学的与境性[M]. 王善博, 译. 北京:东方出版社, 2001: 273.
|
[8] |
习近平 . 努力造就一支忠诚干净担当的高素质干部队伍[J]. 当代党员, 2019(3):4-6.
|
[9] |
Burnham J C . The evolution of editorial peer review[J]. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1990,263(10):1323-1329.
doi: 10.1001/jama.1990.03440100023003
URL
|
[10] |
Tennant J P, Dugan J M, Graziotin D ,et al. A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review[J]. F1000 Research, 2017,6:1151.
|
[11] |
万昊, 谭宗颖, 朱相丽 . 同行评议与文献计量在科研评价中的作用分析比较[J]. 图书情报工作, 2017,61(1):134-152.
|
[12] |
Walker R, da Silva P R . Emerging trends in peer review: A survey[J]. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2015,9:169.
|
[13] |
常唯, 李自乐, 王成 , 等. 开放评议与双盲评议在国际科技期刊质量控制中的价值[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2016,27(1):18-24.
|
[14] |
黄雪梅, 张红, 张晓 . 学术研究成果同行评议模式的分析与研究[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2016,27(6):592-597.
|
[15] |
Bruce R, Chauvin A, Trinquart L ,et al. Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals:A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. BMC Medicine, 2016,14:85.
doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0631-5
URL
|
[16] |
李金珍, 庄景春, 邱炳武 . 《心理学报》开放性同行评审方式探索及初步成效[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2015,26(2):139-142.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201409250929
|
[17] |
张劼圻 . 国外科技期刊开放式同行评议中参与者积极性研究[J]. 编辑学报, 2015,27(4):319-322.
|
[18] |
郭伟 . 群审稿——一种专家主动审稿模式的探索[J]. 编辑学报, 2018,30(3):222-226.
|
[19] |
Bornmann L, Daniel H D. Reliability of reviewers' ratings when using public peer review: A case study[J]. Learned Publishing, 2010,23(2):124-131.
|
[20] |
常唯, 曹会聪, 曹金 , 等. 国际科技期刊同行评议的实践与特点[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2016,27(1):10-17.
|
[21] |
Adams J . Therise of research networks[J]. Nature, 2012,490(7420):335-336.
doi: 10.1038/490335a
|
[22] |
乌尔里希·贝克, 伊丽莎白·贝克-格恩塞姆. 全球热恋[M]. 樊荣, 译. 北京:北京大学出版社, 2014.
|
[23] |
Chubin D E, Hackett E J. Peerless science:Peer review and U.S. science policy[M]. New York: State University of New York Press, 1990.
|
[24] |
毛莉莉 . 论同行评议的公平、公正原则[D]. 上海:东华大学, 2007.
|
[25] |
Ben-David J. 科学家在社会中的角色[M]. 赵佳苓, 译.成都:四川人民出版社, 1988: 147-148.
|
[26] |
张勇刚 . 中西科学期刊比较研究[D]. 合肥:中国科学技术大学, 2018.
|
[27] |
Kronick D A . Peer review in 18th-century scie.pngic journalism[J]. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1990,263(10):1321-1322.
doi: 10.1001/jama.1990.03440100021002
URL
|
[28] |
Spier R . The history of the peer-review process[J]. Trends in Biotechnology, 2002,20(8):357-358.
doi: 10.1016/S0167-7799(02)01985-6
URL
|
[29] |
Kronick D A . Anonymity and identity: Editorial policy in the early scie.pngic journal[J]. The Library Quarterly, 1988,58(3):221-237.
doi: 10.1086/602012
URL
|
[30] |
Fox R. Pluralism please[M] ∥The future of medical journals. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1991: 62-66.
|
[31] |
Baldwin M . In referees we trust?[J]. Physics Today, 2017,70(2):44-49.
|
[32] |
施郁. 从引力波谈爱因斯坦的幸运[EB/OL]. ( 2016 -02-14)[2018-06-27]. http:∥blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-4395-956018.html.
|
[33] |
Bruce L R Smith . The United States:The formation and breakdown of the post-war government-science compat[M] ∥ Solingen E. Scientists and state, domestic structures and the international context. Ann Arbor:The University of Michigan Press, 1994: 33-61.
|
[34] |
龚旭 . 政府与科学:说不尽的布什报告[J]. 科学与社会, 2015,5(4):82-101.
|
[35] |
Curry B K . Institutionalization:The final phase of the organizational change process[J]. Administrator's Notebook, 1991,35(1):312.
|
[36] |
de Solla Price D J. Little science,big science[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 1963.
|
[37] |
Conseil International des Unions Scie. pngiques. A tentative study of the publication of original scie.pngic literature[R]. Paris:[s. n.], 1962.
|
[38] |
Stamps A E III . Advances in peer review research: An introduction[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics, 1997,3(1):3-10.
doi: 10.1007/s11948-997-0012-8
URL
|
[39] |
Merton R K . The Matthew effect in science:The reward and communication systems of science are considered[J]. Science, 1968,159(3810):56-63.
doi: 10.1126/science.159.3810.56
URL
|
[40] |
Gustafson T . The controversy over peer review[J]. Science, 1975,190(4219):1060-1066.
doi: 10.1126/science.190.4219.1060
URL
|
[41] |
Mahoney M J . Publication prejudices:An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system[J]. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1977,1(2):161-175.
doi: 10.1007/BF01173636
URL
|
[42] |
Crane D . The gatekeepers of science:Some factors affecting the selection of articles for scie.pngic journals[J]. American Sociologist, 1967,2(4):195-201.
|
[43] |
Lock S . A difficult balance:Editorial peer review in medicine[M]. London:Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust, 1985: 213.
|
[44] |
Guarding the guardians . Research on editorial peer review[J]. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1990,263:1317-1441.
doi: 10.1001/jama.1990.03440100011001
URL
|
[45] |
St Martin J . "Socialization":The politics and history of a psychological concept,1900-1970[D]. Middletown, USA:Wesleyan University, 2007.
|
[46] |
The Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers . Online submission and peer review systems[R]. Bristol: Mark Ware Consulting Ltd., 2005.
|
[47] |
白林林, 祝忠明 . arXiv可持续发展计划的运营与管理机制剖析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2017,61(11):55-62.
|
[48] |
Odlyzko A M . Tragic loss or good riddance? The impending demise of traditional scholarly journals[J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 1995,42(1):71-122.
|
[49] |
Smith R . Opening up BMJ peer review[J]. British Medical Journal, 1999,318(7175):4.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7175.4
URL
|
[50] |
Shanahan D. A peerless review? Automating methodological and statistical review[EB/OL] . ( 2016 -05-23)[2019-01-18]. https:∥blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2016/05/23/peerless-review-automating-methodological-statistical-review/.
|
[51] |
ACP. Interactive public peer review[EB/OL].[2018-06-10]. https:∥www.atmospheric-chemistry-and-physics.net/peer_review/interactive_review_process.html.
|
[52] |
PLoS ONE. Editorial and peer review process[EB/OL].[2018-06-10]. https:∥journals.plos.org/plosone/s/editorial-and-peer-review-process.
|
[53] |
Frontiers. Frontiers Open Science Platform enables scie.pngic excellence at scale[EB/OL]. ( 2017 -12-05)[2018-07-20]. https:∥blog.frontiersin.org/2017/12/05/frontiers-open-science-platform-enables-scie.pngic-excellence-at-scale/?blogsub=confirming#subscribe-blog.
|
[54] |
eLife. The editorial process[EB/OL].[2018-06-10]. https:∥submit.elifesciences.org/html/elife_author_instructions.html#process.
|
[55] |
Stern B M , O'Shea E K. Scie.pngic publishing in the digital age[EB/OL]. ( 2018 -06-26)[2018-07-20]. http:∥asapbio.org/digital-age.
|
[56] |
Parrish D M, Bruns D E . US legal principles and confidentiality of the peer review process[J]. Journal of the American Medical Association, 2002,287:2839-2841.
doi: 10.1001/jama.287.21.2839
URL
|
[57] |
Enserink M. European science funders ban grantees from publishing in paywalled journals[EB/OL]. ( 2018 -09-04)[2018-11-01]. https:∥www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/09/european-science-funders-ban-grantees-publishing-paywalled-journals.
|
[58] |
Castelvecchi D . Google unveils search engine for open data[J]. Nature, 2018,561(7722):161-162.
|