The Tyranny of the Harsh Reviewer
Visualizações: 340DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15451/ec2025-04-14.17-1-2Keywords:
Peer review, Scientific judgment, Editorial processDownloads
References
Baumeister RF, Bratslavsky E, Finkenauer C, Vohs KD (2001) Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology5: 323–370. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2680.5.4.323
Borrell B (2010) Nature rejects Krebs’s paper, 1937. The Scientist. Available at: https://www.the-scientist.com/nature-rejects-krebss-paper-1937-43452
Gray MW (2017) Lynn Margulis and the endosymbiont hypothesis: 50 years later. Molecular Biology of the Cell 28: 1285–1287. doi: 10.1091/mbc.E16-07-0509 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.e16-07-0509
Pier EL, Brauer M, Filut A, Kaatz A, Raclaw J, Nathan MJ, Ford CE, Carnes M (2018) Low agreement among reviewers evaluating the same NIH grant applications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115: 2952–2957. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1714379115 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1714379115
Sagan L (1967) On the origin of mitosing cells. Journal of Theoretical Biology 14: 225–274. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(67)90079-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(67)90079-3
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ulysses Albuquerque
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
