Manuscript reviewing: too long a concealed form of scholarship?

Nursing Inquiry 3 (4):195-199 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Reviewing manuscripts prior to publication is an increasingly time consuming activity for many professionals. This paper proposes that reviewing is a significant form of scholarship that deserves more overt attention, and an increased level of sharing among reviewers on their unique approach to the task. A review of relevant literature reveals a range of reviewing procedures and practices among journals, some of which are relatively novel within nursing. Research is reportedly scant on the topic, and the research that has been undertaken shows that the best reviewers are not necessarily the most senior; indeed the more senior and busy the reviewer, the more likely the review shall be superficial and hasty. Within this paper I include a personal approach to reviewing that draws upon the thinking of Richard Bernstein and promotes a ‘conversational’—as apposed to an ‘adversarial’—style.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,642

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

Improving the peer review of narrative literature reviews.Jennifer A. Byrne - 2016 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 1 (1).
Acknowledgment to Reviewers of Volume 7.[author unknown] - 2012 - Constructivist Foundations 7 (3):242-242.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-26

Downloads
13 (#288,494)

6 months
5 (#1,552,255)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?