首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
文章检索
  按 检索   检索词:      
出版年份:   被引次数:   他引次数: 提示:输入*表示无穷大
  收费全文   61篇
  免费   2篇
  63篇
  2024年   3篇
  2023年   2篇
  2022年   1篇
  2020年   4篇
  2019年   4篇
  2018年   1篇
  2017年   2篇
  2016年   5篇
  2015年   2篇
  2014年   4篇
  2013年   6篇
  2012年   1篇
  2010年   3篇
  2007年   3篇
  2006年   1篇
  2005年   2篇
  2004年   3篇
  2003年   2篇
  2002年   3篇
  2000年   1篇
  1999年   1篇
  1998年   2篇
  1997年   3篇
  1996年   1篇
  1995年   1篇
  1993年   2篇
排序方式: 共有63条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
21.
    
Journal editors are gatekeepers; they review and shape the work of others, and influence the journal's direction and quality. They also contribute to the body of knowledge within a field as authors. The author role of editors of the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis is described. Annual publication rates of the 55 former and current editors and associate editors are presented and discussed.  相似文献   
22.
The growth of social psychology in Asia from 1970 to 2008 was examined through a bibliometric analysis of articles in the ISI Web of Science database that listed Asian‐based authors. The 1866 articles have appeared at an accelerating rate, and represent a rapidly‐growing share of global publications in the field. Publication trajectories of different Asian nations show the Indian first wave, Hong Kong and Japan's second wave, and China and Taiwan's third wave of growth. Trends in the rates of Asian first authorship, single‐nation authorship, and cross‐cultural research suggest that Asian social psychology is increasingly more autonomous and distinctive.  相似文献   
23.
24.
Peer review and innovation   总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1  
Two important aspects of the relationship between peer review and innovation includes the acceptance of articles for publication in journals and the assessment of applications for grants for the funding of research work. While there are well-known examples of the rejection by journals of first choice of many papers that have radically changed the way we think about the world outside ourselves, such papers do get published eventually, however tortuous the process required. With grant applications the situation differs in that the refusal of a grant necessarily curtails the possible research that may be attempted. Here there are many reasons for conservatism and reservation as to the ability of a grant allocation process based on peer review to deliver truly innovative investigations. Other methods are needed; although such methods need not be applied across the board, they should constitute the methods whereby some 10–20% of the grant monies are assigned. The nomination of prizes for specific accomplishments is one way of achieving innovation although this presumes that investigators or institution already have available the money necessary to effect the innovations; otherwise it is a question of the selection and funding of particular individuals or institutions and requiring them to solve particular problems that are set in the broadest of terms.  相似文献   
25.
What happens when the scientific tradition of openness clashes with potential societal risks? The work of American toxic-exposure epidemiologists can attract media coverage and lead the public to change health practices, initiate lawsuits, or take other steps a study’s authors might consider unwarranted. This paper, reporting data from 61 semi-structured interviews with U.S. toxic-exposure epidemiologists, examines whether such possibilities shaped epidemiologists’ selection of journals for potentially sensitive papers. Respondents manifested strong support for the norm of scientific openness, but a significant minority had or would/might, given the right circumstances, publish sensitive data in less visible journals, so as to prevent unwanted media or public attention. Often, even those advocating such limited “burial” upheld openness, claiming that less visible publication allowed them to avoid totally withholding the data from publication. However, 15% of the sample had or would, for the most sensitive types of data, withhold publication altogether. Rather than respondents explaining their actions in terms of an expected split between “pure science” and “social advocacy” models, even those publishing in the more visible journals often described their actions in terms of their “responsibility”. Several practical limitations (particularly involving broader access to scientific literature via the Internet) of the strategy of burial are discussed, and some recommendations are offered for scientists, the media, and the public.  相似文献   
26.
    
《创造性行为杂志》2017,51(4):314-316
  相似文献   
27.
    
M. V. Dougherty 《Theoria》2019,85(3):219-246
Disguised plagiarism often goes undetected. An especially subtle type of disguised plagiarism is translation plagiarism, which occurs when the work of one author is republished in a different language with authorship credit taken by someone else. I focus on the challenge of demonstrating this subtle variety of plagiarism and examine the corruptive influence that plagiarizing articles exert on unsuspecting researchers who later cite them in the downstream literature as genuine products of research. I conclude by arguing that an open discussion of plagiarizing articles in philosophy is necessary for maintaining the reliability of the body of published research and for restoring integrity to scholarly communication.  相似文献   
28.
Trends in anxiety assessment were established by examining the methods reported in anxiety-related papers published in three prominent behavior therapy journals from 1970 to 2002. Assessment methods were categorized using Lang's three-system concept of anxiety (P. J. Lang, 1968) as an organizational framework. Analysis of the research methods suggests two primary patterns. First, multisystem assessment declined in the last several years by comparison with previous years whereas the assessment of a single response system (typically self-report) has increased. Second, among anxiety-related papers reporting multimodal assessment, physiological assessment returned to 1970s-era frequency in recent years after an upsurge in the mid-1980s and early 1990s. Some possible interpretations and implications of these trends are discussed.  相似文献   
29.
This essay discusses some of the problems with current authorship practices and puts forward a proposal for a new system of credit allocation: in published works, scientists should more clearly define the responsibilities and contributions of members of research teams and should distinguish between different roles, such as author, statistican, technician, grant writer, data collector, and so forth. Dr. Resnik is an Associate Professor of Philosophy and Director of the Center for the Advancement of Ethics, University of Wyoming. Information is available on website: http://www.uwyo.edu/bu/acct/cae.htm  相似文献   
30.
Summary

This article highlights ethical issues in publication. It addresses the provenance of ideas, problems with joint authorship, plagiarism, and the practice of duplicate submission of material for publication. Confidentiality and privacy matters, and the protection of human subjects in publication of research and clinical case studies are also discussed. The article further examines biases in literature reviews, and in the biased selection of one's best results for publication, intentional misinterpretation of data and the slanting of discussion, summary, and conclusions. Finally, the article deals with ethical problems that can arise in the publication of sponsored research, and the ethical responsibilities of editors and readers.  相似文献   
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号