[1] |
Publons. 全球同行评议现状报告[R]. 北京:Clarivate, 2018[2021-05-24]. https://max.book118.com/html/2019/1012/7140012153002062.shtm
URL
|
[2] |
刘桂锋, 钱锦琳, 田丽丽. 开放科学:概念辨析、体系解析与理念探析[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2018, 38(11):1-9.
|
[3] |
FOSTER. Resources:Help us promote open science and contribute training content[EB/OL].[2021-05-24]. https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/resources .
URL
|
[4] |
Wolfram D, Wang P L, Hembree A,et al. Open peer review:Promoting transparency in open science[J]. Scientometrics, 2020, 125(2):1033-1051.
doi: 10.1007/s11192-020-03488-4
URL
|
[5] |
Peters D P, Ceci S J. Peer-review practices of psychological journals:The fate of published articles,submitted again[J]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1982, 5(2):187-195.
doi: 10.1017/S0140525X00011183
URL
|
[6] |
钱寿初. 审稿是否可以公开了?[J]. 编辑学报, 1999, 11(3):184-186.
|
[7] |
马续补, 刘玮, 秦春秀. 基于知识图谱的我国政策评估研究主体、知识基础、研究热点与演进分析[J]. 现代情报, 2019, 39(3):166-177.
|
[8] |
McNutt R A, Evans A T, Fletcher R H, et al. The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. A randomized trial[J]. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 1990, 263(10):1371-1376.
doi: 10.1001/jama.1990.03440100079012
URL
|
[9] |
Walsh E, Rooney M, Appleby L,et al. Open peer review:A randomised controlled trial[J]. British Journal of Psychiatry, 2000, 176(1):47-51.
doi: 10.1192/bjp.176.1.47
URL
|
[10] |
van Rooyen S, Godlee F, Evans S, et al. Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review:A randomized trial[J]. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 1998, 280(3):234-237.
doi: 10.1001/jama.280.3.234
URL
|
[11] |
Nobarany S, Booth K S. Use of politeness strategies in signed open peer review[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2015, 66(5):1048-1064.
doi: 10.1002/asi.2015.66.issue-5
URL
|
[12] |
Vinther S, Nielsen O H, Rosenberg J,et al. Same review quality in open versus blinded peer review in "Ugeskrift for Læger"[J]. Danish Medical Journal, 2012, 59(8):A4479.
|
[13] |
Melero R, López-Santoveña F. Referees’ attitudes toward open peer review and electronic transmission of papers[J]. Food Science and Technology International, 2001, 7(6):521-527.
doi: 10.1106/0MXD-YM6F-3LM6-G9EB
URL
|
[14] |
汪谋岳, 王娟. 审稿人对公开审稿人身份的态度调查分析[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2002, 13(6):516-517.
|
[15] |
Ross-Hellauer T, Deppe A, Schmidt B. Survey on open peer review:Attitudes and experience amongst editors,authors and reviewers[J]. PLoS ONE, 2017, 12(12):e0189311.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189311
URL
|
[16] |
Ross-Hellauer T. What is open peer review? A systematic review[J]. F1000Research, 2017, 6:588.
|
[17] |
孟美任, 张晓林. 中国科技期刊引入开放同行评议机制的思考与建议[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2019, 30(2):149-155.
|
[18] |
Knowledge M M, Sumner T, Shum S B, et al. Redesigning the peer review process:A developmental theory-in-action[C]∥4th International Conference on the Designing Cooperative Systems[J]. Amsterdam:IOS Press, 2000:19-34.
|
[19] |
Carmi R, Koch C. Improving peer review with CARMA[J]. Learned Publishing, 2007, 20(3):173-176.
doi: 10.1087/leap.2007.20.issue-3
URL
|
[20] |
Leek J T, Taub M A, Pineda F J. Cooperation between referees and authors increases peer review accuracy[J]. PLoS ONE, 2011, 6(11):e26895.
|
[21] |
da Silva J A T. Challenges to open peer review[J]. Online Information Review, 2019, 43(2):197-200.
doi: 10.1108/OIR-04-2018-0139
URL
|
[22] |
Khan K. Is open peer review the fairest system? No[J]. British Medical Journal, 2010, 341:c6425.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.c6425
URL
|
[23] |
宫福满. 科技期刊论文审稿人署名弊大于利[J]. 编辑学报, 2007, 19(1):80.
|
[24] |
冯广清. 医学期刊的公开审稿制度[J]. 中华医学图书情报杂志, 2012, 21(4):79-81.
|
[25] |
Jordi B I V, Leaver C. Bias in open peer-review:Evidence from the English superior courts[J]. The Journal of Law,Economics,and Organization, 2015, 31(3):431-471.
|
[26] |
Lee C J, Sugimoto C R, Zhang G,et al. Bias in peer review[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2013, 64(1):2-17.
doi: 10.1002/asi.22784
URL
|
[27] |
Thelwall M, Allen L, Papas E R,et al. Does the use of open,non-anonymous peer review in scholarly publishing introduce bias? Evidence from the F1000Research post-publication open peer review publishing model[J]. Journal of Information Science, 2020(4):016555152093867.
|
[28] |
Lee M, Om K, Koh J. The bias of sighted reviewers in research proposal evaluation:A comparative analysis of blind and open review in Korea[J]. Scientometrics, 2000, 48(1):99-116.
doi: 10.1023/A:1005636503358
URL
|
[29] |
Morrison J. The case for open peer review[J]. Medical Education, 2006, 40(9):830-831.
pmid: 16925631
|
[30] |
da Silva J A T. The need for post-publication peer review in plant science publishing[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2013, 4:485.
|