1.
Seema Rawat, Sanjay Meena. Publish or perish: Where are we heading?. Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2014;19(2):87. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3999612/.
Bias, peer review, and publishing
1.
Valentina Tartari, Markus Perkmann, Ammon Salter. In good company: The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists. Research Policy. 2014;43(7):1189-1203. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.02.003
1.
Daniele Fanelli. Positive results receive more citations, but only in some disciplines. Scientometrics. 2013;94:701-709. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0757-y
1.
Carole J. Lee, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Guo Zhang, Blaise Cronin. Bias in peer review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2012;64(1):2-17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22784
1.
Declaration on Research Assessment. San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment.; 2012. https://sfdora.org/read/.
1.
Liv Langfeldt, Svein Kyvik. Researchers as evaluators: tasks, tensions and politics. Higher Education. 2011;62:199-212. doi:10.1007/s10734-010-9382-y
1.
Craig M. Rawlings, Daniel A. McFarland. Influence flows in the academy: Using affiliation networks to assess peer effects among researchers. Social Science Research. 2011;40(3):1001-1017. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.10.002
1.
J. Rogers Hollingsworth. Doing institutional analysis: implications for the study of innovations. Review of International Political Economy. 2011;7(4):595-644. doi:10.1080/096922900750034563
1.
Mark J. Rice. The institutional review board is an impediment to human research: the result is more animal-based research. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine. 2011;6:12. doi:10.1186/1747-5341-6-12
1.
Kenny Smith. Learning bias, cultural evolution of language, and the biological evolution of the language faculty. Human Biology. 2011;83(2):261-278. doi:10.3378/027.083.0207