Página 1 dos resultados de 3591 itens digitais encontrados em 0.023 segundos

Processo de revisão pelos pares : por que são rejeitados os manuscritos submetidos a um periódico científico?; Peer review process : why are manuscripts submitted to scientific journals rejected?; ¿Evaluación de pares : por qué el rechazo de los manuscritos sometidos a un periódico científico?

Job, Ivone; Mattos, Ana Maria; Trindade, Alexandre Alex Alves
Fonte: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Publicador: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica Formato: application/pdf
POR
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.11%
Quando os pesquisadores enviam os resultados de suas investigações para publicação, têm sua produção intelectual avaliada pelos membros da comunidade científica. O processo, denominado sistema de arbitragem, de avaliação de originais, de avaliação pelos pares, referee system ou peer review, consiste no uso de árbitros para assessorar a avaliação dos manuscritos submetidos para publicação. Quando submetido a um processo de análise, as possibilidades de publicação do manuscrito são três: aprovado; aceito, sujeito a correções ou rejeitado, e pode apresentar um caráter pedagógico ou punitivo. Este estudo analisa 191 pareceres referentes a manuscritos enviados a um periódico no período, de 1997 até 2007, com a finalidade de conhecer os motivos que levaram os avaliadores à sua rejeição para publicação.; When researchers send the results of their research for publication, their intellectual production is assessed by members of the scientific community. This process, called referee system or peer review, consists in the use of referees to help evaluate the manuscripts submitted for publication. When the manuscript is submitted to a review process, the chances of publication are three: approved, accepted subject to correction...

Master students’ reactions to peer review

Carvalho, Ana Amélia Amorim
Fonte: International Council on Education for Teaching (ICET) Publicador: International Council on Education for Teaching (ICET)
Tipo: Conferência ou Objeto de Conferência
Publicado em //2008 ENG
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.09%
Peer Review is an advanced activity for students that has been used to improve writing skills, to familiarize students with what constitutes good versus poor work, and to provide them with experiences they cannot get otherwise. In this paper we describe the use of peer review in two ICT Master Courses and students’ reaction to it. Surprisingly, most of these master students (Portuguese teachers) were not familiar with peer review and initially had difficulty in accepting it. However, most of them recognized its benefits.; Universidade do Minho. Centro de Investigação em Educação (CIEd).

What is the future of peer review? Why is there fraud in science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it all a case of:“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing?”

Triggle, Chris R; Triggle, David J
Fonte: Dove Medical Press Publicador: Dove Medical Press
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica
Publicado em /02/2007 EN
Relevância na Pesquisa
56.07%
Peer review is an essential component of the process that is universally applied prior to the acceptance of a manuscript, grant or other scholarly work. Most of us willingly accept the responsibilities that come with being a reviewer but how comfortable are we with the process? Peer review is open to abuse but how should it be policed and can it be improved? A bad peer review process can inadvertently ruin an individual’s career, but are there penalties for policing a reviewer who deliberately sabotages a manuscript or grant? Science has received an increasingly tainted name because of recent high profile cases of alleged scientific misconduct. Once considered the results of work stress or a temporary mental health problem, scientific misconduct is increasingly being reported and proved to be a repeat offence. How should scientific misconduct be handled—is it a criminal offence and subject to national or international law? Similarly plagiarism is an ever-increasing concern whether at the level of the student or a university president. Are the existing laws tough enough? These issues, with appropriate examples, are dealt with in this review.

Evaluating Management Information Systems, A Protocol for Automated Peer Review Systems

Black, Gordon C.
Fonte: PubMed Publicador: PubMed
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica
Publicado em 05/11/1980 EN
Relevância na Pesquisa
65.97%
This paper discusses key issues in evaluating an automated Peer Review System. Included are the conceptual base, design, steps in planning structural components, operation parameters, criteria, costs and a detailed outline or protocol for use in the evaluation.

Concurrent Peer Review of Psychiatric Care: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Luckey, James W.; Broughton, Andrew; Zelman, William; Sorensen, James E.
Fonte: PubMed Publicador: PubMed
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica
Publicado em 05/11/1980 EN
Relevância na Pesquisa
65.97%
This paper emerges from an evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of peer review in altering either utilization patterns or reimbursement for two CHAMPUS-eligible populations receiving psychiatric care. The major focus is on a methodological problem heretofore overlooked in PSRO evaluation: autocorrelated data. Our results show that by taking autocorrelation of data into account, the findings were altered significantly.

Facilitated Peer Review Committee Report, 2012-2013; Facilitated Peer Review Committee Documents from August 2013

Facilitated Peer Review Committee; Acord, Sophia; Dorsey, Alan; Jefferson, Rebecca; Simpson, Betsy; Taylor, Laurie N.; Telg, Ricky
Fonte: George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida; George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida ( Gainesville, FL ) Publicador: George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida; George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida ( Gainesville, FL )
Tipo: mixed material Formato: Documentation
Publicado em //Oct. 2013 ENGLISH
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.04%
PDF versions of Report with and without documentation.

Peer review: The Holy Office of modern science

Henneberg, M.
Fonte: Heron Publishing Publicador: Heron Publishing
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica
Publicado em //1997 EN
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.14%
A brief historical overview of the origins of peer review reveals that it is neither the best means of evaluating contributions to science nor the one most commonly used during the period in which the modern scientific method developed. Throughout history, most scientists published their views without formal review and peers published their criticisms openly. It is argued here that peer review as now undertaken by most scientific journals stifles scientific communication, slows the advancement of knowledge and encourages dishonest behavior among referees. Alternatives to peer review that have already been used by some journals and funding bodies are described. Since these alternatives have proved themselves in practice, the now commonly practised form of peer review can be abandoned or modified. Electronic communication can facilitate this process.; Maciej Henneberg

An approach to peer review in forensic pathology

Sims, N.; Langlois, N.; Byard, R.
Fonte: Churchill Livingstone Publicador: Churchill Livingstone
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica
Publicado em //2013 EN
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.04%
Peer review in forensic pathology has been a long time in evolution but may provide a very useful mechanism to check for, and to correct, errors, in addition to establishing an important educative vehicle for pathologists. A process is reported that has been established at our institution that involves both informal peer review in the mortuary and formal auditing of a set number of cases. Every autopsy case is discussed at a daily meeting of pathologists before a provisional cause of death is released. In addition, one in ten cases including all homicides, deaths in custody, suspicious and paediatric cases, and randomly selected additional cases undergo formal auditing by a second pathologist. Finally, administrative staff check the completed report. This formalized process, in a jurisdiction where autopsies are usually performed by only one pathologist, has been extremely useful in standardizing autopsy reports and in enabling pathologists to discuss cases and associated issues on a regular basis.; D. Noel Sims, Neil E.I. Langlois, Roger W. Byard

Criteria of the peer-review process for publication of experimental and quasi-experimental research in Psychology

Ramos-??lvarez, Manuel M.; Vald??s-Conroy, Berenice; Catena Mart??nez, Andr??s
Fonte: Asociaci??n Espa??ola de Psicolog??a Conductual Publicador: Asociaci??n Espa??ola de Psicolog??a Conductual
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica
ENG
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.01%
Experimental research in Psychology is characterized by ensuring a method that guarantees objectivity, reliability, validity and replication of results. In this theoretical study we have elaborated a set of criteria for the preparation and review of quasiexperimental and experimental research manuscripts, which follows such methodological objective dictates. These criteria are based on a review of structural aspects in experimental research, in the modern theory of psychological theorization, and in the validity theory of scientific research. All these aspects are complemented with those proposed in revisions about empirically-based, and statistically-based peer-review systems. We distinguish between essential, obligatory, and complementary criteria. These criteria are organized according to a measuring tool ???the ExperimenCheck system-, including report characteristics, antecedents, theoretical development, design, analysis and interpretation of results, format and bibliographical sources. We also introduce the general guidelines of a reviewing process that fulfils scientific criteria, using the proposed evaluative guideline as the main organizing principle.; La investigaci??n experimental en Psicolog??a se rige por un m??todo que garantiza la objetividad...

Current and Evolving Models of Peer Review

Fresco Santalla, Ana; Hernández Pérez, Antonio
Fonte: Taylor & Francis Publicador: Taylor & Francis
Tipo: info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion; info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Publicado em //2014 ENG
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.19%
New models of scientific publishing and new ways of practicing peer review have injected a recent dynamism into the scholarly communication system. In this article, we delineate the context of the traditional peer review model, reflect upon some of the first experiences with open peer review and forecast some of the challenges that new models for peer review will have to meet. Our findings suggest that the peer review function has the potential to be divorced from the journal system, so that the responsibility to judge the significance of a paper may no longer fall exclusively to formal reviewers, but may be assessed by the whole readership community.

Evaluating Peer Review Criteria: The Geo-Twist

Weimer, Katherine Hart; Grossner, Karl; Wrisley, David Joseph
Fonte: Universidade Rice Publicador: Universidade Rice
Tipo: Presentation; Text; published version
ENG
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.15%
The evaluation and impacts of digital humanities works, and defining their scholarly contributions is quite complex and hotly debated within many scholarly communities. Peer review criteria are being developed, including those recently published from DH Commons. GeoHumanities interactive scholarly works present numerous additional challenges in their evaluation, that is, spatially-inflected digital projects embody assumptions in their data and visual outputs that differentiate them from text-based research. A poster and pre-conference workshop at DH2015 was conducted as a community consultation designed to explore review criteria of GeoHumanities interactive scholarly works. “Supporting Peer-Review for GeoHumanities and Spatially-Inflected Projects” (Weimer and Wrisley) and “Exploring Peer Review in the GeoHumanities,” (Wrisley, Weimer and Grossner) addressed the issues surrounding peer review of digital humanities interactive scholarly works, specifically those in geohumanities. Workshop presenters prepared a criteria document, based on the DH Commons Review Guidelines, enhanced with criteria specific to geospatial works. Attendees reviewed pre-selected projects, working in small groups to test the draft criteria. Further community engagement is sought in order to enhance the draft document.

Exploring Document Clustering Techniques for Personalized Peer Assessment in Exploratory Courses

Crespo García, Raquel
Fonte: Universidade Carlos III de Madrid Publicador: Universidade Carlos III de Madrid
Tipo: info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion; info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObject
Publicado em //2010 ENG
Relevância na Pesquisa
56.06%
Peer review has been proposed as a complement to project-based learning in courses covering a wide and heterogeneous syllabus. By reviewing peers' projects, students can explore other subjects thoroughly apart from their own project topic. This objective relies however in a proper distribution of the works to review, which is a complex and time-consuming task. Beyond simple topic selection, students may report different types of works, which influence their peers' assessment; for example, works focused on a project development approach versus in-depth literature researches. Introducing detailed metadata is time-consuming (thus users are typically reluctant) and, even more important, prone to error. In this paper we explore the potential of text mining and natural language processing technologies for automatic classification of texts, in order to facilitate the adaptation and diversification of the works assigned to the students for review, in the context of a course on Artificial Intelligence.; This work was partially funded by Best Practice Network ICOPER (Grant No. ECP-2007-EDU-417007), Learn3 project, “Plan Nacional de I+D+I” TIN2008-05163/TSI, and eMadrid network, S2009/TIC-1650, “Investigación y Desarrollo de tecnologías para el e-learning en la Comunidad de Madrid”.; Proceedings of: Computer-Supported Peer Review in Education: Synergies with Intelligent Tutoring Systems (CSPRED 2010)...

A Supporting System for Adaptive Peer Review based on Learners' Profiles

Crespo García, Raquel; Pardo Sánchez, Abelardo
Fonte: Universidade Carlos III de Madrid Publicador: Universidade Carlos III de Madrid
Tipo: info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion; info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObject
Publicado em //2010 ENG
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.16%
Intelligent tutoring systems cover a wide range of educational processes. There are however scarce attempts to apply those principles for adapting peer review processes according to the student's profile in the educational settings. In this paper, the Adaptive Peer Review methodology is reviewed, paying special attention to the problem of building the student profile. A supporting system based on such Adaptive Peer Review methodology is then introduced, which should facilitate teachers the adoption and deployment of adaptation to the student in peer assessment experiences in real educational settings. Experimental results supporting the ideas presented are briefly discussed.; This work was partially funded by the Best Practice Network ICOPER (Grant No. ECP-2007-EDU-417007), the Learn3 project, “Plan Nacional de I+D+I” TIN2008-05163/TSI, and the eMadrid network, S2009/TIC-1650, “Investigación y Desarrollo de tecnologías para el e-learning en la Comunidad de Madrid”.; Proceedings of: Computer-Supported Peer Review in Education: Synergies with Intelligent Tutoring Systems (CSPRED 2010), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA, June 14th, 2010.

Peer review and journal impact factor: the two pillars of contemporary medical publishing

Triaridis, S; Kyrgidis, A
Fonte: LITHOGRAPHIA Antoniadis I.-Psarras Th. G.P. Publicador: LITHOGRAPHIA Antoniadis I.-Psarras Th. G.P.
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica
Publicado em /12/2010 EN
Relevância na Pesquisa
56.2%
The appraisal of scientific quality is a particularly difficult problem. Editorial boards resort to secondary criteria including crude publication counts, journal prestige, the reputation of authors and institutions, and estimated importance and relevance of the research field, making peer review a controversial rather than a rigorous process. On this background different methods for evaluating research may become required, including citation rates and journal impact factors (IF), which are thought to be more quantitative and objective indicators, directly related to published science. The aim of this review is to go into the two pillars of contemporary medical publishing, that is the peer review process and the IF. Qualified experts' reviewing the publications appears to be the only way for the evaluation of medical publication quality. To improve and standardise the principles, procedures and criteria used in peer review evaluation is of great importance. Standardizing and improving training techniques for peer reviewers, would allow for the magnification of a journal's impact factor. This may be a very important reason that impact factor and peer review need to be analyzed simultaneously. Improving a journal's IF would be difficult without improving peer-review efficiency. Peer-reviewers need to understand the fundamental principles of contemporary medical publishing...

Statistical Sampling in a Legislative Framework for peer review of Medical services

Nicholls, Des; Bell, Robin
Fonte: The Law Book Company Publicador: The Law Book Company
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica
Relevância na Pesquisa
66%
This article discusses problems addressed in developing an efficient way of identifying levels of inappropriate professional practice in delivery of Medicare services, using statistical sampling within a legislative peer-review scheme. An efficient altern

Peer review and manuscripts management in scientifi c journals: guidelines for good practice

Giménez Toledo, Elea
Fonte: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (España) Publicador: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (España)
Tipo: Artículo Formato: 259768 bytes; application/pdf
SPA
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.08%
3 páginas.-- Crítica de libros.; El sistema de revisión por expertos o peer review ha sido objeto de una abundante literatura científica. No es tan fácil, sin embargo, encontrar libros específicamente dedicados a la gestión editorial de las revistas científicas en toda su complejidad, incluyendo los aspectos prácticos relacionados con los sistemas de evaluación de los originales. Por eso, la aparición en el mercado editorial de Peer review and manuscripts … es una estupenda noticia, no solo para quienes estudian los procesos relacionados con la comunicación científica sino, sobre todo, para los editores de revistas científicas.; Peer reviewed

A few bad apples are enough: an agent-based peer review game

Cabotà, Juan; Grimaldo, Francisco; Cadavid, Lorena; Bravo, Giangiacomo; Squazzoni, Flaminio
Fonte: Universidade Autônoma de Barcelona Publicador: Universidade Autônoma de Barcelona
Tipo: Conferência ou Objeto de Conferência Formato: application/pdf
Publicado em //2014 ENG
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.04%
Following previous agent-based research on peer review, this paper presents a game theory-inspired model that looks at peer review as a cooperation dilemma. We tested different scientist behaviours and network topologies in order to understand their implications on the quality, efficiency and type of resource distribution in the science system. We tested random, scale-free and small world networks connecting scientists and three types of referee behaviour: self-interested (providing unreliable opinion), normative referees (providing reliable opinion) and conformist reviewers (conforming to other referees’ behaviour). Preliminary results indicate that differences in the combination of referee behaviour have significant impact on the quality of the process and that the percentage of conformists is one of the most crucial model parameters.

Avaliação pelos pares nas revistas brasileiras de ciência da informação: procedimentos e percepções dos atores; Peer review in brazilian journals of information science: procedures and perceptions of actors

Pavan, Cleusa; UFRGS; Stumpf, Ida Regina Chitto; Universidaded Federal do Rio Grande so Sul-UFRGS
Fonte: Departamento de Ciência da Informação – UFSC Publicador: Departamento de Ciência da Informação – UFSC
Tipo: info:eu-repo/semantics/article; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion; ; Formato: application/pdf
Publicado em 22/10/2009 POR
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.04%
http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/1518-2924.2009v14n28p73O estudo analisa o processo de avaliação pelos pares empregado pelas revistas brasileiras de Ciência da Informação com conceito A (nacional), conforme o Qualis/CAPES 2006, num total de seis revistas. Os sujeitos do estudo foram os editores, membros das comissões editoriais, avaliadores e autores. A coleta de dados foi realizada através de questionários específicos para cada categoria de sujeitos e por meio da análise dos fascículos publicados em 2006. Apresenta os principais procedimentos de avaliação adotados pelas revistas estudadas. Conclui que as revistas, em sua maioria, seguem procedimentos similares e de acordo com os padrões científicos.; The study examines the process of peer review used by the Brazilian journals of Information Science, wich were evaluated with A concept (national) according to Qualis/CAPES 2006, totaling six journals. The study subjects were the editors, members of editorial committees, reviewers and authors. Data collecting was conducted through questionnaires, specific to each category of subjects, and by the analysis of issues published in 2006. It presents the main peer review procedures adopted by the journals focused. It concludes that the journals...

Peer review no ensino superior de química: atividade didática para a apropriação do discurso da ciência

Oliveira,Jane Raquel Silva de; Porto,André Luiz Meleiro; Queiroz,Salete Linhares
Fonte: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Química Publicador: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Química
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica Formato: text/html
Publicado em 01/01/2014 PT
Relevância na Pesquisa
65.97%
In this article we describe a peer review exercise used in undergraduate chemistry course in which the students wrote and prepared critique of scientific texts produced by other students in the class. We investigated, based on the critical comments made by the peers, evidences of the appropriation of scientific discourse and a better understanding of its practice by the students. Additionally, we present our own conclusions on the use of such exercise applied to an organic chemistry course offered to undergraduate chemistry students at a Brazilian public university

An evaluation of the effectiveness of teamwork, with an emphasis on peer assessment and peer review, in an introductory engineering course

Daly,C.
Fonte: Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy Publicador: Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
Tipo: Artigo de Revista Científica Formato: text/html
Publicado em 01/12/2014 EN
Relevância na Pesquisa
66.19%
The Faculty of Engineering at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) offers a core first-year engineering design and innovation course, ENGG1000, undertaken during the first and second semesters. This course is highly regarded in the sense that it provides an introduction to many concepts and activities that students will experience over the four-year minimum for which they are undergraduates at UNSW. Approximately 1400 students enrol in the semester 1 course across the Faculty, typically 80 of which undertake the Mining Engineering stream. Students in teams of between six and eight design and construct a physical model to represent an aspect of their chosen discipline. For example, in 2013 the mining engineers designed and built a model dragline. This paper concentrates a major aspect of the course - the involvement of team members in group activities and the development of the associated skills of peer assessment and peer review as the course progresses over a period of 12 weeks. The term 'peer assessment' in this paper refers to the requirement for students to assess the design components of their peers. This course has a structured requirement in terms of how a successful design is a result of a sound design process rather than a 'try and see' approach. Each student must describe in detail the process they undertook to achieve their final design - hence the approach is independent of the discipline and/or project selected. Peer review is a process whereby students review the contribution of their team members to the overall design. This activity encourages team involvement and interaction. The final assessment mark can be moderated by the outcome of this peer review...