1.
Trish Reay, C.R. Hinings. Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics. Organization Studies. 2009;30(6):629-652. doi:10.1177/0170840609104803
Bias, peer review, and publishing
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
1.
Erick H. Turner, Annette M. Matthews, Eftihia Linardatos, Robert A. Tell, Robert Rosenthal. Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy. New England Journal of Medicine. 2008;358(3):252-260. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa065779
1.
David B. Resnik, Christina Gutierrez-Ford, Shyamal Peddada. Perceptions of Ethical Problems with Scientific Journal Peer Review: An Exploratory Study. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2008;14(3):305-310. doi:10.1007/s11948-008-9059-4
1.
Liv Langfeldt. The policy challenges of peer review: managing bias, conflict of interests and interdisciplinary assessments. Research Evaluation. 2006;15(1):31-41. doi:10.3152/147154406781776039
1.
Joshua Frank. Technological lock-in, positive institutional feedback, and research on laboratory animals. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics. 2005;16(4):557-575. doi:10.1016/j.strueco.2004.11.001
1.
Liv Langfeldt. Expert panels evaluating research: decision-making and sources of bias. Research Evaluation. 2004;13(1):51-62. doi:10.3152/147154404781776536
1.
Fiona Godlee. Making Reviewers Visible: Openness, Accountability, and Credit. JAMA. 2002;287(21):2762-2765. doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2762
1.
Alan Baddeley. So Where Should We Publish?*. Cortex. 2001;37(4):598-599. doi:10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70604-X