scholarly journals Opening the Black Box of Peer Review

Physics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simine Vazire
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
Vol 98 (4) ◽  
pp. 207-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan M Jette
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-17
Author(s):  
Kelsey Poulson‐Ellestad ◽  
Scott Hotaling ◽  
Laura J. Falkenberg ◽  
Patricia Soranno

Author(s):  
Matteo Cavalleri

Publishing the results of one’s research is an integral part of the scientific process, yet scholarly journals are often seen as black boxes by researchers. What happens to a paper after it is submitted? Who is deciding on its fate? What is the role of the journal editor and the editorial office? How does the peer-review process work, and are its core principles still relevant in today’s changing publishing landscape? In this talk I will discuss these questions in an attempt to de-mystify the peer review process from an editor’s perspective, and cover the whats, the hows and the whys of peer review.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 765-765
Author(s):  
Elia Ortenberg ◽  
Shalanda Bynum

Abstract What happens to applications after they are submitted to the National Institutes of Health, and how can you better prepare yourself and your application for the process of peer review? The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) works closely with the 24 funding institutes and centers at the National Institutes of Health that provide funding support for projects of high scientific merit and high potential impact. CSR conducts the first level of review for the majority of grant applications submitted to the NIH, which includes 90% of R01s, 85% of Fellowships, and 95% of Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) applications as well as many other research and training opportunity activities. In this capacity, CSR helps to identify the most meritorious projects, cutting-edge research, and future scientists who will advance the mission of the NIH: to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability. The purpose of this project is to provide an overview of 1) what happens to NIH applications before, during, and after peer review at CSR; 2) a summary of new and current peer review policies and practices that impact investigators and their submitted applications; and 3) strategies for developing a strong NIH grant application. Peer review is the cornerstone of the NIH grant supporting process, and an insider’s view can shine a light inside the “Black Box” of how the most meritorious projects are identified.


2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 843-848
Author(s):  
Jonathan P. Saxe
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
pp. 62-76
Author(s):  
Radhika Gorur
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document