首页> 外文会议>2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering >Ethics of scientific peer review: Are we judging or helping the review recipients?
【24h】

Ethics of scientific peer review: Are we judging or helping the review recipients?

机译:科学同行评审的伦理:我们是在评审还是帮助评审接受者?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Traditionally, ethics of a profession or organization are laid down by their pioneers, or subtly emerge over time as the organization advance. Getting conversant to these ethics requires teaching new or upcoming professionals, in order to avoid any form of misconduct, either deliberately or unknowingly. Peer review has been used as a quality control measure in the scientific community to ensure that only novel, high-quality and significant research work can be published. Typically, experienced and well respected scientists are selected to review the work of their peers or other upcoming scientists. Ideally, people who ethically qualify as reviewers, should have high reputation in terms of their ability to give objective and well-informed judgement, write constructive and helpful critique in a timely manner and, are honest and open in revealing any conflict of interest that may exist. The key objectives of peer review are two fold: 1) summative - to assess the quality of scholarly work, and 2) formative - to provide constructive feedback and thus, to mentor authors to become both better researchers, and better writers.
机译:传统上,职业或组织的道德准则是由其先驱者制定的,或者随着组织的发展而随着时间的推移而微妙地浮现出来。熟悉这些道德规范要求教会新的或即将来临的专业人员,以免有意或无意地避免任何形式的不当行为。同行评审已被用作科学界的质量控制措施,以确保只能发表新颖,高质量和重要的研究成果。通常,选择经验丰富且受人尊敬的科学家来审查其同行或其他即将到来的科学家的工作。理想情况下,在道德上具有审查员资格的人,应具有做出客观,明智的判断,及时撰写具有建设性和有益帮助的批评的能力,并应诚实坦诚地公开任何可能引起利益冲突的人。存在。同行评审的主要目标有两个方面:1)总结-评估学术工作的质量; 2)形成性-提供建设性反馈,从而指导作者既成为​​更好的研究者,又成为更好的作家。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号