| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
*[http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/three-myths-about-scientific-peer-review Three myths about scientific peer review] | *[http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/three-myths-about-scientific-peer-review Three myths about scientific peer review] | ||
*[http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1536616.1536619 "Begin with an Author's response to Reviews"] - proposal to submit past reviews along with articles | *[http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1536616.1536619 "Begin with an Author's response to Reviews"] - proposal to submit past reviews along with articles | ||
| − | *[https://www.dropbox.com/s/67n49i9k3cb28mo/GOBLE-CW2014.ppt Presentation by Professor Carole | + | *[https://www.dropbox.com/s/67n49i9k3cb28mo/GOBLE-CW2014.ppt Presentation by Professor Carole Goble] |
Revision as of 15:43, 19 July 2014
Assorted articles and presentations
- Experience report and new proposal: community-driven reviewing and validation of publications [arXiv , ACM DL]
- Research Wranglers: Initiatives to Improve Reproducibility of Study Findings (Environmental Health Perspectives)
- Predatory publishing
- Three myths about scientific peer review
- "Begin with an Author's response to Reviews" - proposal to submit past reviews along with articles
- Presentation by Professor Carole Goble
