start:induction_module:pink_group
This is an old revision of the document!
Pink Group on 'the Review Process'
Resources:
Nicholas and Gordon, 2011. A Quick Guide to Writing a Solid Peer Review Eos, 92(28), 233-234. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011EO280001
Plus the information provided in the 'Good Scientific Practice' section of the wiki.
Questions:
1. Which major steps does the publication process of a scientific paper contain?
2. When do you accept to perform a review?
3. Why would you accept to perform a review?
4. What are your obligations as a reviewer?
5. How is plagiarism discovered?
(if time allows)
6 a) Wouldn’t it be better to drop the peer-review process altogether?
b) What would be an alternative?
start/induction_module/pink_group.1619713802.txt.gz · Last modified: 2021/04/29 18:30 by boessenkool_karin