Sentence examples for peer review practices from inspiring English sources

This may, of course, change over time and publishers will continue to encourage innovation in peer review practices.

In the social sciences, arts and humanities, research assessment has been similarly limited to tracking impact within academia, using the prestige of one's publisher as a proxy for the importance of one's work (again, as a supplement for peer review practices).

Moreover, some of these studies mixed ESL learners with native speakers of English in peer review practices (Anderson et al., 2010; Bradley, 2014; Cho & Cho, 2011; Liu & Sadler, 2003; McGroarty & Zhu, 1997; Zhu, 1995, 2001).

This indicates that more attention has been given to peer review in tertiary settings where students' levels of proficiency are high and time is available for peer review practices.

Another research direction still connected to history of mathematics, could be to analyse how the scientific labor market reacts to exogenous events [33, 34] or to study the innovation dynamics due for instance to the impact of the computer age, of the Internet, of the peer review practices, etc. in the disciplinary prevalence.

Scholarly journals are beginning to challenge traditional peer review practices by implementing OPR, yet each OPR implementation differs.

However, in the midst of the intensifying global competition for research funding and publication resources, same-field peer review practice would tend to put the peer reviewer and the author in a positional conflict of interest, thus tempting them to risk one's reviewer anonymity to undermine or block other's work to be published (Matthews 2016).

Secondly, some journals have started to adopt the 'results-free peer review' practice (Appleyard and Bal 2017; Else 2016).

In order to avoid these inappropriate behaviours, contentions and conflicts to poison and hinder scientific credibility and progress, it is conceivable to strategically implement open peer review practice.

There is a danger that traditional peer review practice, since it disproportionately places power in the hands of selected academics, undermines attempts to bring the sectors together.

To conclude, I suggest that pooling knowledge from three specialist communities journal editors, researchers in language and communication, and wordface professionals such as author's editors, medical writers and translators would lead to improvements in peer review practice and better research on this complex process.