Bias, peer review, and publishing

Jesús Rey-Rocha, M. José Martín-Sempere, Jesús Martínez-Frías, Fernando López-Vera. Some Misuses of Journal Impact Factor in Research Evaluation. Cortex. 2001;37(4):595-597. doi:10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70603-8

John P. A. Ioannidis. Effect of the Statistical Significance of Results on the Time to Completion and Publication of Randomized Efficacy Trials. JAMA. 1998;279(4):281-286. doi:10.1001/jama.279.4.281

Simon Wessely. Peer review of grant applications: what do we know? The Lancet. 1998;352(9124):301-305. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11129-1

S. N. Goodman, J. Berlin, S. W. Fletcher, R. H. Fletcher. Manuscript quality before and after peer review and editing at Annals of Internal Medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1994;121(1):11-21. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-121-1-199407010-00003

Kay Dickersin, Yuan-I Min. Publication Bias: The Problem That Won’t Go Away. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1993;703(1):135-148. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26343.x

G.D.L. Travis, Harold Maurice Collins. New Light on Old Boys: Cognitive and Institutional Particularism in the Peer Review System. Science, Technology, & Human Values. 1991;16(3):322-341. doi:10.1177/016224399101600303

Kay Dickersin. The Existence of Publication Bias and Risk Factors for Its Occurrence. JAMA. 1990;263(10):1385-1389. doi:10.1001/jama.1990.03440100097014

David F. Horrobin. The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation. JAMA. 1990;263(10):1438-1441. doi:10.1001/jama.1990.03440100162024

W. Brian Arthur. Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events. The Economic Journal. 1989;99(394):116-131. doi:10.2307/2234208

Douglas P. Peters, Stephen J. Ceci. Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1982;5(2):187-195. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00011183