Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Peer review: An unflattering picture.Kenneth M. Adams - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):135-136.
  • What to do about peer review: Is the cure worse than the disease?Thomas R. Zentall - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):166-167.
  • Do peer reviewers really agree more on rejections than acceptances? A random-agreement benchmark says they do not.Gerald S. Wasserman - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):165-166.
  • The nonstate explanation of hypnosis: Stronger evidence is required.Benjamin Wallace - 1987 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10 (3):524-525.
  • Chairman's action: The importance of executive decisions in peer review.Peter Tyrer - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):164-165.
  • Disagreement among journal reviewers: No cause for undue alarm.Lawrence J. Stricker - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):163-164.
  • On attending to the data: The limiting conditions of hypnotic phenomena.Henderikus J. Stam - 1987 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10 (3):522-524.
  • Hypnosis research: Paradigms in conflict.Nicholas P. Spanos - 1987 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10 (3):525-531.
  • Restoration of Attention by Rest in a Multitasking World: Theory, Methodology, and Empirical Evidence.Frank Schumann, Michael B. Steinborn, Jens Kürten, Liyu Cao, Barbara Friederike Händel & Lynn Huestegge - 2022 - Frontiers in Psychology 13.
    In this work, we evaluate the status of both theory and empirical evidence in the field of experimental rest-break research based on a framework that combines mental-chronometry and psychometric-measurement theory. To this end, we provide a taxonomy of rest breaks according to which empirical studies can be classified. Then, we evaluate the theorizing in both the basic and applied fields of research and explain how popular concepts relate to each other in contemporary theoretical debates. Here, we highlight differences between all (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • In praise of randomness.Peter H. Schönemann - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):162-163.
  • Now that we know how low the reliability is, what shall we do?Kurt Salzinger - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):162-162.
  • Toward openness and fairness in the review process.Byron P. Rourke - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):161-161.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Rethinking emotion science: new theory section for Cognition & Emotion.Klaus Rothermund & Sander L. Koole - 2020 - Cognition and Emotion 34 (4):628-632.
    A cumulative emotion science requires sustained investments in theory development. To encourage such investments, a new section will be added to Cognition & Emotion that is specifically devoted to...
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Some indices of the reliability of peer review.Robert Rosenthal - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):160-161.
  • Is unreliability in peer review harmful?Henry L. Roediger - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):159-160.
  • The conquest of vitalism or the eclipse of organicism? The 1930s Cambridge organizer project and the social network of mid-twentieth-century biology.Erik Peterson - 2014 - British Journal for the History of Science 47 (2):281-304.
    In the 1930s, two concepts excited the European biological community: the organizer phenomenon and organicism. This essay examines the history of and connection between these two phenomena in order to address the conventional ‘rise-and-fall’ narrative that historians have assigned to each. Scholars promoted the ‘rise-and-fall’ narrative in connection with a broader account of the devitalizing of biology through the twentieth century. I argue that while limited evidence exists for the ‘fall of the organizer concept’ by the 1950s, the organicism that (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • The process of peer review: Unanswered questions.Linda D. Nelson - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):158-159.
  • False memories of the future: A critique of the applications of probabilistic reasoning to the study of cognitive processes.Mihnea Moldoveanu & Ellen Langer - 2002 - Psychological Review 109 (2):358-375.
  • Reflections on the peer review process.Herbert W. Marsh & Samuel Ball - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):157-158.
  • Justice, efficiency and epistemology in the peer review of scientific manuscripts.Michael J. Mahoney - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):157-157.
  • Should the blinded lead the blinded?Stephen P. Lock - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):156-157.
  • Why is the reliability of peer review so low?Donald Laming - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):154-156.
  • Can state and nonstate theorists collaborate?Stanley Krippner - 1987 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10 (3):521-522.
  • Do we really want more “reliable” reviewers?Helena Chmura Kraemer - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):152-154.
  • Hypnosis and the limits of socialpsychological reductionism.Laurence J. Kirmayer - 1987 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10 (3):521-521.
  • Confusion between reviewer reliability and wise editorial and funding decisions.Charles A. Kiesler - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):151-152.
  • Accuracy, bias, self-fulfilling prophecies, and scientific self-correction.Lee Jussim - 2017 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 40.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • How to make replications mainstream.Hans IJzerman, Jon Grahe & Mark J. Brandt - 2018 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 41.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Referee agreement in context.Lowell L. Hargens - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):150-151.
  • What cognitive representations underlie social attitudes?Anthony G. Greenwald - 1990 - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 28 (3):254-260.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Is there an alternative to peer review?Richard Greene - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):149-150.
  • Replication, reliability and peer review: A case study.Michael E. Gorman - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):149-149.
  • Phenomenal awareness and self-presentation.Donald R. Gorassini - 1987 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10 (3):519-520.
  • On forecasting validity and finessing reliability.J. Barnard Gilmore - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):148-149.
  • Peer review is not enough: Editors must work with librarians to ensure access to research.Steve Fuller - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):147-148.
  • The role of replication in psychological science.Samuel C. Fletcher - 2021 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (1):1-19.
    The replication or reproducibility crisis in psychological science has renewed attention to philosophical aspects of its methodology. I provide herein a new, functional account of the role of replication in a scientific discipline: to undercut the underdetermination of scientific hypotheses from data, typically by hypotheses that connect data with phenomena. These include hypotheses that concern sampling error, experimental control, and operationalization. How a scientific hypothesis could be underdetermined in one of these ways depends on a scientific discipline’s epistemic goals, theoretical (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Journal availability and the quality of published research.Jack M. Fletcher - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):146-147.
  • When nonreliability of reviews indicates solid science.Douglas Lee Eckberg - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):145-146.
  • Different rates of agreement on acceptance and rejection: A statistical artifact?Marilyn E. Demorest - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):144-145.
  • Peer review: Explicit criteria and training can help.Fred Delcomyn - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):144-144.
  • What should be done improve reviewing?Rick Crandall - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):143-143.
  • Evaluating scholarly works: How many reviewers? How much anonymity?John D. Cone - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):142-142.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Unreliable peer review: Causes and cures of human misery.Andrew M. Colman - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):141-142.
  • Consensus and the reliability of peer-review evaluations.Stephen Cole - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):140-141.
  • Does group discussion contribute reliability of complex judgments?Patricia Cohen - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):139-140.
  • The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation.Domenic V. Cicchetti - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):119-135.
  • Reflections from the peer review mirror.Domenic V. Cicchetti - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):167-186.
  • The predictive validity of peer review: A neglected issue.Robert F. Bornstein - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):138-139.
  • Representational explanations of “process” dissociations in recognition: The DRYAD theory of aging and memory judgments.Aaron S. Benjamin - 2010 - Psychological Review 117 (4):1055-1079.
  • Reliability, fairness, objectivity and other inappropriate goals in peer review.John C. Bailar - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):137-138.