The extension of Peer review, how should it or should not be done?

Social Epistemology 17 (1):65 – 77 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This Article does not have an abstract

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,497

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Group Peer Disagreement.J. Adam Carter - 2014 - Ratio 29 (1):11-28.
Been there, done that: Breaking free from Kuhn.Steven French - 2003 - Social Epistemology 17 (2 & 3):157 – 160.
Is Peer Review a Good Idea?Remco Heesen & Liam Kofi Bright - 2021 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 72 (3):635-663.
Does Social Systems Theory Need a General Theory of Autopoiesis?R. D. King - 2015 - Constructivist Foundations 10 (2):183-185.
No Peeking: Peer Review and Presumptive Blinding.Nathan Ballantyne & Jared Celniker - forthcoming - Canadian Journal of Philosophy:1-14.
The evidence-based argument in peer disagreement.Elif KÜTÜKCÜ - 2021 - Dini Araştırmalar 24 (61):281-296.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
30 (#739,160)

6 months
14 (#214,836)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

“Peer Review is Melting Our Glaciers”: What Led the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to Go Astray?Laszlo Kosolosky - 2015 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 46 (2):351-366.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Add more references