{"title":"少做同行评议的理由","authors":"Kate Derickson","doi":"10.1177/02637758221142339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The increasingly fraying nature of the peer review process is well known to anyone partic-ipating in it. Editors are finding that they have to ask four or five people to secure one commitment to review, while prospective reviewers are finding themselves overwhelmed by requests that they struggle to fit into already unmanageable workloads. From my vantage point","PeriodicalId":48303,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","volume":"115 1","pages":"963 - 966"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The case for doing less in our peer reviews\",\"authors\":\"Kate Derickson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02637758221142339\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The increasingly fraying nature of the peer review process is well known to anyone partic-ipating in it. Editors are finding that they have to ask four or five people to secure one commitment to review, while prospective reviewers are finding themselves overwhelmed by requests that they struggle to fit into already unmanageable workloads. From my vantage point\",\"PeriodicalId\":48303,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space\",\"volume\":\"115 1\",\"pages\":\"963 - 966\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221142339\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Planning D-Society & Space","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758221142339","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The increasingly fraying nature of the peer review process is well known to anyone partic-ipating in it. Editors are finding that they have to ask four or five people to secure one commitment to review, while prospective reviewers are finding themselves overwhelmed by requests that they struggle to fit into already unmanageable workloads. From my vantage point
期刊介绍：
EPD: Society and Space is an international, interdisciplinary scholarly and political project. Through both a peer reviewed journal and an editor reviewed companion website, we publish articles, essays, interviews, forums, and book reviews that examine social struggles over access to and control of space, place, territory, region, and resources. We seek contributions that investigate and challenge the ways that modes and systems of power, difference and oppression differentially shape lives, and how those modes and systems are resisted, subverted and reworked. We welcome work that is empirically engaged and furthers a range of critical epistemological approaches, that pushes conceptual boundaries and puts theory to work in innovative ways, and that consciously navigates the fraught politics of knowledge production within and beyond the academy.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
