46 0 0 0 OA 査読の作法

早川 智
日大医学雑誌 (ISSN:00290424)
vol.78, no.4, pp.207-211, 2019-08-01 (Released:2019-09-20)

Peer review system is one of the most important processes to secure objectivity in sciences. Manuscripts submitted by any author, even if he or she is new comer or veteran, must be read critically by other scientists who have enough experience and extensive knowledge on related fields. While any person such as self-proclaimed scientists can publish their “new discoveries” in blogs, general books and/or open access predatory journals without undergoing review and editing process, their findings offer very little scientific information and occasionally cause health problems. Critical reading and reviewing scientific manuscripts takes times and efforts for scientists who would like to spend their own precious time for clinical or research activities. However any member of scientific community has moral obligations to read critically unpublished manuscripts as well as published ones in order to reach better scientific truth. In this sense, it is important to learn authentic manner to review manuscripts. For young scientists, peer-review experiences are also useful for responding to peer-reviewed opinions against their own manuscripts.


外部データベース (DOI)

Twitter (46 users, 49 posts, 103 favorites)

これは良いアドバイスだった。自分が良い査読者と感じる時は、「問題点があるので,ここを加筆修正すればアクセプトされる」という書き方をしているときだ。 / 早川智「査読の作法」https://t.co/ShY8tsouff
ちなみに論文の書き方や読み方を手取り足取り指導してくださる教員というのは少ないかと思いますが、 「査読の仕方」などはもっと教わる機会は無いかと思います。 そのような方で、もし論文査読依頼がきた方は、 こちらが参考になりますのでどうぞ
【論文、文献(Jstage)見るならこれ!】 〜拝読の作法〜 ①リスペスト ②批判的吟味 ③至る背景の吟味 https://t.co/tAY7agRz19 これ見ないと文献全て読めないと思います!なので、『まずはこれを見ろ』です^_^ ※P値は本当に0.5で良いの?P値の誤解集 https://t.co/8ujyAAnXf3 #おかべん https://t.co/CHeYl7zkNI
【論文・査読】「2019 査読の作法」https://t.co/cRsyeIfbkQ  下記は本文引用 “批判的読解の「批判」というのはKritisches Lesen あるいはCritical reading の明治時代の誤訳であり,対象をけなす,貶めるというニュアンスはない.

収集済み URL リスト