SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Cited in:

CrossRef

This article has been cited by:

  1. 1
    Henrik von Wehrden, Jannik Schultner, David J. Abson, A call for statistical editors in ecology, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2015,

    CrossRef

  2. 2
    Catarina Ferreira, Guillaume Bastille-Rousseau, Amanda M. Bennett, E. Hance Ellington, Christine Terwissen, Cayla Austin, Adrian Borlestean, Melanie R. Boudreau, Kevin Chan, Adrian Forsythe, Thomas J. Hossie, Kristen Landolt, Jessica Longhi, Josée-Anne Otis, Michael J. L. Peers, Jason Rae, Jacob Seguin, Cristen Watt, Morgan Wehtje, Dennis L. Murray, The evolution of peer review as a basis for scientific publication: directional selection towards a robust discipline?, Biological Reviews, 2015, 90, 2
  3. 3
    M. Cantor, S. Gero, The missing metric: quantifying contributions of reviewers, Royal Society Open Science, 2015, 2, 2, 140540

    CrossRef

  4. 4
    Per Milberg, Evidence-based vegetation management: prospects and challenges, Applied Vegetation Science, 2014, 17, 3
  5. 5
    Diogo Veríssimo, David L. Roberts, The academic welfare state: making peer-review count, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2013, 28, 11, 623

    CrossRef

  6. 6
    Joanna M. Setchell, On Editing the International Journal of Primatology, International Journal of Primatology, 2012, 33, 1, 1

    CrossRef

  7. 7
    Jason R. Rohr, Lynn B. Martin, Reduce, reuse, recycle scientific reviews, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2012, 27, 4, 192

    CrossRef

  8. 8
    Jason R. Rohr, Lynn B. Martin, Type I error is unlikely to hinder review recycling: a reply to Montesinos, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2012, 27, 6, 312

    CrossRef

  9. 9
    Ulysses P. Albuquerque, Marcelo A. Ramos, Maria F. T. Medeiros, Experiences of Ethnobotanists with Publication: A First Approach, BioScience, 2011, 61, 9, 706

    CrossRef

  10. 10
    Armen Yuri Gasparyan, Lilit Ayvazyan, Heather Blackmore, George D. Kitas, Writing a narrative biomedical review: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors, Rheumatology International, 2011, 31, 11, 1409

    CrossRef

  11. You have free access to this content11
    BERNHARD STATZNER, VINCENT H. RESH, Negative changes in the scientific publication process in ecology: potential causes and consequences, Freshwater Biology, 2010, 55, 12
  12. 12
    Louis de Mesnard, On Hochberg et al.’s “The tragedy of the reviewer commons”, Scientometrics, 2010, 84, 3, 903

    CrossRef

  13. 13
    Marco Pautasso, Hanno Schäfer, Peer review delay and selectivity in ecology journals, Scientometrics, 2010, 84, 2, 307

    CrossRef

  14. 14
    Marco Pautasso, Cesare Pautasso, Peer Reviewing Interdisciplinary Papers, European Review, 2010, 18, 02, 227

    CrossRef

  15. 15
    Jeremy Fox, Owen L. Petchey, Pubcreds: Fixing the Peer Review Process by “Privatizing” the Reviewer Commons, Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 2010, 91, 3, 325

    CrossRef

  16. 16
    Doug P Aubrey, Marcel Holyoak, Targeting journals and covering letters, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2010, 8, 3, 161

    CrossRef

  17. 17
    Marco Pautasso, Worsening file-drawer problem in the abstracts of natural, medical and social science databases, Scientometrics, 2010, 85, 1, 193

    CrossRef

  18. 18
    Editorial: Géotechnique—moving on, Géotechnique, 2009, 59, 1, 1

    CrossRef