| 1 |
Merton, R.K. (1973), The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, Chicago: University of Chicago Press |
| 2 |
Zuckerman, H., Merton, R.K. (1971), Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalisation, structure and functions of the referee system. Minerva, 9, pp. 66–100 |
| 3 |
Horrobin, D.F. (1990), The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, pp. 1438–1441 |
| 4 |
Bornmann, L. (2011), Scientific peer review. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 45, pp. 199–245 |
| 5 |
Siegelman, S.S. (1991), Assassins and zealots: Variations in peer review. Radiology, 178, pp. 637–642 |
| 6 |
Oppenheim, C. (1997), The correlation between citation counts and the 1992 research assessment exercise ratings for British research in genetics, anatomy and archaeology. Journal of Documentation, 53, pp. 477–487 |
| 7 |
Crane, D. (1967), The gatekeepers of science: Some factors affecting the selection of articles for scientific journals. American Sociologist, 32, pp. 195–201 |
| 8 |
Ingelfinger, F.J. (1974), Peer review in biomedical publication. Am J Med, 56, pp. 686–692 |
| 9 |
Peters, D.P., Ceci, S.J. (1982), Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, pp. 187–255 |
| 10 |
Cole, S., Cole, J.R., Simon, G.A. (1981), Chance and consensus in peer review. Science, 214, pp. 881–886 |
| 11 |
Cronin, B., McKenzie, G. (1992), The trajectory of rejection. Journal of Documentation, 48 (3), pp. 310–317 |
| 12 |
Starbuck, W.H. 2003), Turning lemons into lemonade: Where is the value in peer reviews? Journal of Management Inquiry, 12, pp. 344–351 |
| 13 |
Wenneras, C., Wold, A. (1997), Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature, 387, pp. 341–343 |
| 14 |
Lawrence, P.A. (2003), The politics of publication. Nature, 422, pp. 259–261 |
| 15 |
Travis, G.D.L., Collins, H.M. (1991), New light on old boys: Cognitive and institutional particularism in the peer review system. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 16 (3), pp. 322–341 |
| 16 |
Burnham, J.C. (1990), The evolution of editorial peer review. JAMA, 263, pp. 1323–1329 |
| 17 |
Van Raan, A.F.J. (2006), Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics, 67 (3), pp. 491–502 |
| 18 |
Aksnes, D.W., Taxt, R.E. (2004), Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: A comparative study at a Norwegian university. Research Evaluation, 13 (1), pp. 33–41 |
| 19 |
Rothwell, P.M., Martyn, C.N. (2000), Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? Brain, 123, pp. 1964–1969 |
| 20 |
Seng, L.B., Willett, P. (1995), The citedness of publications by United Kingdom library schools. Journal of Information Science, 21 (1), pp. 68–71 |
