Why do peer reviewers decline to review manuscripts? A study of reviewer invitation responses

Learned Publishing

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 5-7

  Willis, Michael ^a  

^a John Wiley and Sons   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85006802718     PISSN: 09531513     EISSN: 17414857     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/leap.1006     Document Type: Review

References (5)

1. Haak (2015, 18 May). F100 and ORCID partner launch standard citing Peer Review activities [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://orcid.org/blog/2015/05/15/f1000-and-orcid-partner-launch-standard-citingpeer-review-activities
2. Johnston, D. (2015). Peer review incentives: a simple idea to encourage fast and effective peer review. European Science Editing, 41(3), 70–71.
3. John Wiley & Sons Ltd (2014). Best practice guidelines on publishing ethics: a publisher’s perspective. Second Edition. Retrieved September 29, 2015 from http://exchanges.wiley.com/ethicsguidelines
4. Nature Publishing Group (2014). Author insights. Retrieved October 29, 2015, from http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1204999
5. Tite, L., & Schroter, S. (2007).Why do peer reviewers decline to review? A survey. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 61, 9–12. doi:10.1136/jech.2006.049817