A review of reviews
Source abstract
Abstract
The different senses of ‘review’ in the scientific literature are distinguished and their roles are sketched. Special attention is paid to critical reviews of scientific books and to the role of referees/reviewers of papers submitted to scientific journals. Some gaps in provision are pointed out.
The source flagged this abstract for review. Check formulas and completeness against the original publication.
Source: openaire · Quality: needs review · Source record ↗
Source flags: short_text
Source flags: short_text
Research context
OpenAlex topics: scientometrics and bibliometrics research · Academic Writing and Publishing · Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (7)
Show source-provided references
1. H.-J. QUADBECK–SEEGER, “World Records in Chemistry” (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 1999) p. 138.
2. K. H. J. BUSCHOW, R. W. CAHN, M. C. FLEMINGS, B. ILSCHNER, E. J. KRAMER and S. MAHAJAN (editors-in-chief), “Encyclopedia of Materials: Science and Technology” (Elsevier, Oxford, 2001).
3. R. W. CAHN, ‘Measurement and Control of Texture’, in “Processing of Metals and Alloys” edited by R. W. Cahn (VCH, Weinheim, 1991) p. 429.
4. Idem., “Artifice and Artefacts: 100 Essays in Materials Science” (Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol and Phildelphia, 1992).
5. J. M. ZIMAN, “Public Knowledge : The Social Dimension of Science” (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1966) p. 148.
6. H. ZUCKERMAN and R. K. MERTON, Minerva 9/1 (1971) 66.10.1007/BF01553188 ↗
7. R. A. WEEKES and D. I. KINSER (editors), “Editing the Refereed Scientific Journal: Practical, Political and Ethical Issues” (IEEE Press, New York, 1994).