• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

同行评审中的文化距离、性别与赞扬

Cultural distance, gender and praise in peer review.

作者信息

Zhang Guangyao, Wang Lili, Wang Xianwen

机构信息

School of Public Administration and Policy, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China.

WISE Lab, Institute of Science of Science and S&T Management, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China.

出版信息

Account Res. 2025 Nov;32(8):1448-1473. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2409310. Epub 2024 Oct 3.

DOI:10.1080/08989621.2024.2409310
PMID:39362649
Abstract

Understanding review comments holds significant importance within the realm of scientific discourse. This study aims to conduct an empirical analysis of factors associated with praise in peer review. The study involved manual labeling of "praise" in 952 review comments drawn from 301 articles published in the British Medical Journal, followed by regression analysis. The study reveals that authors tend to receive longer praise when they share a cultural proximity with the reviewers. Additionally, it is observed that female reviewers are more inclined to provide praise In summary, these discoveries contribute valuable insights for the development of a constructive peer review process and the establishment of a more inclusive research culture.

摘要

在科学论述领域,理解同行评审意见具有重要意义。本研究旨在对同行评审中与赞扬相关的因素进行实证分析。该研究涉及对从《英国医学杂志》发表的301篇文章中抽取的952条评审意见进行“赞扬”的人工标注,随后进行回归分析。研究表明,当作者与评审人员文化相近时,作者往往会收到更长的赞扬。此外,还观察到女性评审人员更倾向于给予赞扬。总之,这些发现为构建建设性的同行评审流程和建立更具包容性的研究文化提供了有价值的见解。

相似文献

1
Cultural distance, gender and praise in peer review.同行评审中的文化距离、性别与赞扬
Account Res. 2025 Nov;32(8):1448-1473. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2409310. Epub 2024 Oct 3.
2
Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training性骚扰与预防培训
3
Do peer reviewers comment on reporting items as instructed by the journal? A secondary analysis of two randomized trials.同行评审员是否按照期刊的要求对报告项目进行评论?两项随机试验的二次分析。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2025 May 8;183:111818. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111818.
4
Vesicoureteral Reflux膀胱输尿管反流
5
Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks管制药品的处方:益处与风险
6
Mid Forehead Brow Lift额中眉提升术
7
Peer review reports of randomized controlled trials in oncology can be short and superficial.肿瘤学中随机对照试验的同行评审报告可能简短且肤浅。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2025 Jun 30;185:111893. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111893.
8
Journals Operating Predatory Practices Are Systematically Eroding the Science Ethos: A Gate and Code Strategy to Minimise Their Operating Space and Restore Research Best Practice.采用掠夺性做法的期刊正在系统性地侵蚀科学精神:一种减少其运营空间并恢复研究最佳实践的把关与编码策略。
Microb Biotechnol. 2025 Jun;18(6):e70180. doi: 10.1111/1751-7915.70180.
9
Conflict of interest policies for editors and peer reviewers in medical journals:cross-sectional study.医学期刊编辑和同行评审员的利益冲突政策:横断面研究
J Clin Epidemiol. 2025 Sep 19:111980. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111980.
10
Shoulder Arthrogram肩关节造影