Access
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Editorial
Nature 439, 118 (12 January 2006) | doi:10.1038/439118a; Published online 11 January 2006
Three cheers for peers
Abstract
Thanks are due to researchers who act as referees, as editors resolve their often contradictory advice.
There is nothing like a high-profile fraud case to encourage journals to reflect on whether the standards and procedures they follow in selecting work for publication are thorough and appropriate. Misconduct creates a negative perception of journals' scientific peer-review processes, and the Hwang fraud saga has already fuelled some misconceptions about how the combination of referees and journal editors actually works.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.