: We consider a research model for manuscript evaluation using a two-stage process. In the first stage, the current submission reminds reviewers of previous reviewing experiences, and then, reviewers aggregate these past review experiences into a kind of norm for assessing the scientific contribution and clarity of writing required for a manuscript. In the second stage, the reviewer's norms are imposed on the manuscript under review, and the reviewer's attention is drawn to discrepancies between the norm retrieved from previous similar peer review experiences and the reality for this submission.

J. A. Garcia

J.J. Montero-Parodi

Category	Quartile
哲学	1
哲学, 医学伦理	1

The association of gender, experience, and academic rank in peer-reviewed manuscript evaluation

ivySCI AI Smartly Parses PDF, Answers Researchers' Questions, and Helps You Understand Papers in Seconds

Journal Info

Category	Quartile
MEDICAL ETHICS	1