Results 11 to 20 of about 1,137,881 (267)
Science, 2014 In this article, the author reflects on his 12 years' experience of the academic refereeing process. In doing so, he aims to provide some encouragement to more junior academics faced with harsh and disheartening reviews, and perhaps to ask some ...
Gray, Anthony
core +5 more sources
AGRADECIMENTO AOS REVISORES / ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO REVIEWERS
, 2023 A Sociedade Brasileira de Geofísica agradece o apoio e a colaboração dos seguintes revisores em benefício da Revista Brasileira de Geofísica durante o ano de 2010.The Brazilian Geophysical Society would like to thank the following reviewers for their ...
REVIEWERS 2010
core +8 more sources
, 2013 Health, Exercise, and Sports Sciences Reviewers' Report for Academic Program ReviewHealth, Exercise, and Sports Sciences, Reviewers' Report, Academic Program ReviewHealth, Exercise, and Sports Sciences Reviewers' Report Academic Program ...
HESS, APR +2 more
core +7 more sources
Reviews, reviewers and reviewing [PDF]
International Orthopaedics, 2016 n ...
Zazgyva, Ancuţa +4 more
openaire +4 more sources
Reviews, reviews, reviews [PDF]
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2016 Deputy Editor‐in‐Chief, Dr Patrick Chien, discusses his top articles from this issue in an audio podcast available at: https://soundcloud.com/bjog/january-editors-choice ...
openaire +2 more sources
Literature Reviews in HCI: A Review of Reviews
Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2023 This paper analyses Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) literature reviews to provide a clear conceptual basis for authors, reviewers, and readers. HCI is multidisciplinary and various types of literature reviews exist, from systematic to critical reviews in the style of essays.
Evropi Stefanidi +8 more
openaire +4 more sources
Review the ‘peer review’ [PDF]
Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 2017 Peer review has been the main form of appraisal of scientific knowledge for over a century. In essence, this process involves the evaluation of a scientific finding by independent experts prior to its dissemination to the scientific community, in an attempt to ensure that both the research and conclusions meet the necessary standards regarding quality,
Blockeel, Christophe +4 more
openaire +3 more sources
Computational Linguistics, 2005 I just returned from the Association for Computational Linguistics’ 43rd Annual Meeting (ACL-2005). The acceptance rate was 18%. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? When the acceptance rate is low, precision tends to be high. The audience can judge precision for itself. If the presentations are good, everyone knows it.
openaire +2 more sources