• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Science, Technology and Human Values >Peer Review and Scholarly Originality: Let 1,000 Flowers Bloom, but Don't Step on Any
【24h】

Peer Review and Scholarly Originality: Let 1,000 Flowers Bloom, but Don't Step on Any

机译：同行评审和学术独创性：让1,000朵花盛开，但不要踩任何花

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

We examine the criticisms and subsequent changes that arise in the course of peer review. Fifty-two scholars who had recently published in Administrative Science Quarterly were surveyed regarding their peer review experience and how their article changed from initial journal submission to eventual publication. Papers that challenged theoretical perspectives faced distinctively high levels of criticism and change, particularly with attention to methodology, while those that offered a new perspective or that extended or combined established perspectives were less criticized and changed. The number of challenge-oriented publications was small as well, suggesting that either few such submissions survive the review process or few are submitted in the first place. Overall, peer review appears open to expansion of the variety of theoretical argument but does little to aid in the winnowing out of established perspectives.
机译：我们研究了同行评审过程中提出的批评和随后的变化。对最近在《行政科学季刊》上发表的52位学者进行了调查，了解他们的同行评审经验以及他们的文章从最初的期刊投稿到最终出版的变化。挑战理论观点的论文面临着特别是方法论方面的高度批评和变革，而提供新观点或扩展或组合既有观点的论文则较少受到批评和改变。面向挑战的出版物的数量也很少，这表明要么很少有这样的作品能在审查过程中生存下来，要么很少就首先提交。总体而言，同行评议似乎可以扩展各种理论论点，但几乎无济于事。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号