This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Cheek, J. (2006). What’s in a number? Issues in providing evidence of impact and quality of research(ers). Qualitative Health Research, 16, 423–435.
Rennie, D. R. (2003). Editorial peer review: Its development and rationale. In F. Godlee, & T. Jefferson (Eds.) Peer review in health sciences (pp. 1–13). London: BMJ Books.
Komesaroff, P. A., Kerridge, I., & Jordens, C., (Writing group). (2008). Journal of bioethical inquiry reviewing policy. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 5(1).
Callaham, M. (2003). The evaluation and training of peer reviewers. In F. Godlee, & T. Jefferson (Eds.) Peer review in health sciences (pp. 164–82). London: BMJ Books.
Smith, R. (2006). Peer review: A flawed process at the heart of science and journals. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 99, 178–182.
Jefferson, T., Rudin, M., Brodney Folse, S., Davidoff, F. (2003). Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. Cochrane Db Syst Rev Issue 4. Art. No.: MR000016. DOI 10.1002/14651858.MR000016.pub3.
Spier, R. E. (2002). Peer review and innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8, 99–108.
Bingham, C. (2003). Peer review on the internet: Are there faster, fairer, more effective methods of peer review? In F. Godlee, & T. Jefferson (Eds.) Peer review in health sciences (pp. 277–96). London: BMJ Books.
Baez, B. (2002). Confidentiality and peer review: The paradox of secrecy in academe. Review of Higher Education, 25, 163–83.
Godlee, F. (2002). Making reviewers visible: Openness, accountability, and credit. JAMA, 287, 2762–2765.
About this article
Cite this article
Komesaroff, P.A., Kerridge, I. & Lipworth, W. The Epistemology and Ethics of Journal Reviewing: A Second Look. Bioethical Inquiry 5, 3–6 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-008-9093-6