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
Bias, peer review, and publishing
1.
Joel A. C. Baum. Free-Riding on Power Laws: questioning the validity of the Impact Factor as a measure of research quality in organization studies. Organization. 2011;18(4):449-466. doi:10.1177/1350508411403531
1.
Hidde Ploegh. End the wasteful tyranny of reviewer experiments. Nature. 2011;472(7344):391-391. doi:10.1038/472391a
1.
Sara Schroter, Trish Groves, Liselotte Højgaard. Surveys of current status in biomedical science grant review: funding organisations’ and grant reviewers’ perspectives. BMC Medicine. 2010;8:62. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-8-62
1.
Michael R. Donaldson, Kyle C. Hanson, Caleb T. Hasler, Timothy D. Clark, Scott G. Hinch, Steven J. Cooke. Injecting youth into peer-review to increase its sustainability: a case study of ecology journals. Ideas in Ecology and Evolution. 2010;3. https://ojs.library.queensu.ca/index.php/IEE/article/view/2346.
1.
Lawrence D. Berg, Jani Vuolteenaho, eds. Critical Toponymies: The Contested Politics of Place Naming. London: Routledge; 2009:306. https://www.routledge.com/Critical-Toponymies-The-Contested-Politics-of-Place-Naming/Berg-Vuolteenaho/p/book/9781138267756.
1.
Steven A. Greenberg. How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network. BMJ. 2009;339:b2680. doi:10.1136/bmj.b2680
1.
Trish Reay, C.R. Hinings. Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics. Organization Studies. 2009;30(6):629-652. doi:10.1177/0170840609104803
1.
Sonia M. R. Vasconcelos, Martha M. Sorenson, Jacqueline Leta. A new input indicator for the assessment of science & technology research? Scientometrics. 2009;80:217-230. doi:10.1007/s11192-008-2082-z
1.
Herbert W. Marsh, Upali W. Jayasinghe, Nigel W. Bond. Improving the peer-review process for grant applications: Reliability, validity, bias, and generalizability. American Psychologist. 2008;63(3):160-168. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.3.160