Filters
cris logo
-
New search Filters
Select from list
Displayed from Show more
You have reached the maximum number of displayed search results.
All results displayed
No results are available for the search performed
Displayed from
You have reached the maximum number of displayed search results.
All results displayed
Loading results
Obtaining statistical data

International projects source: SICRIS

New Frontiers of Peer Review (PEERE)

Edit
Researchers (4)
no. Code Name and surname Research area Role Period No. of publications
1.  01467  PhD Vladimir Batagelj  Mathematics  Researcher  2014 - 2018  1 
2.  02465  PhD Anuška Ferligoj  Sociology  Researcher  2014 - 2018  0 
3.  28074  PhD Luka Kronegger  Sociology  Researcher  2014 - 2018  0 
4.  02943  PhD Franc Mali  Sociology  Researcher  2014 - 2018  0 
Organisations (2)
no. Code Research organisation City Registration number No. of publications
1.  0582  University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences  Ljubljana  1626957  1 
2.  1554  University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics  Ljubljana  1627007  6 
Abstract
Peer review is a cornerstone of science, whose quality and efficiency depends on a complex, large-scale collaboration process, which is sensitive to motivations, incentives and institutional contexts. Recent proofs of the failures of peer review, due to judgment bias and parochialism and cases of misconduct, have contributed to calls for a reconsideration of the rigour and quality of the process. This Action aims to improve efficiency, transparency and accountability of peer review through a trans-disciplinary, cross-sectorial collaboration. The objectives of this Action are: (i) to analyse peer review in different scientific areas by integrating quantitative and qualitative research and incorporating recent experimental and computational findings; (ii) to evaluate implications of different models of peer review and to explore new incentive structures, rules and measures to improve collaboration in all stages of the peer review process; (iii) to involve science stakeholders in data sharing and testing initiatives, (iv) to define collaboratively a joint research agenda that points to an evidence-based peer review reform. Not only can a better peer review system improve the self- regulation processes of science to benefit all science stakeholders, it can also increase the social recognition and credibility of science in Europe.
Confirmation required
Views history
Favourite