The role of the anonymous voice in post-publication peer review versus traditional peer review

Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Judit Dobránszki

Open source

DOI: 10.17646/kome.2015.27
Published: 2015-12-07
Container: KOME
Publisher: KOME Journal
Open access: unknown

Credibility signals

uncertain Score 64/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

supportingDOI registered: A matching record was returned by Crossref. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
supportingDOI resolves: A matching record was returned by Crossref. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredOpen access status: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
supportingMetadata completeness: All 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.17646/kome.2015.27,
  title = {The role of the anonymous voice in post-publication peer review versus traditional peer review},
  author = {Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva and Judit Dobránszki},
  year = {2015},
  journal = {KOME},
  doi = {10.17646/kome.2015.27},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.17646/kome.2015.27}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - The role of the anonymous voice in post-publication peer review versus traditional peer review
AU  - Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva
AU  - Judit Dobránszki
PY  - 2015
JO  - KOME
DO  - 10.17646/kome.2015.27
UR  - https://doi.org/10.17646/kome.2015.27
ER  -

APA

Silva, J. A. T. D., & Dobránszki, J. (2015). The role of the anonymous voice in post-publication peer review versus traditional peer review. KOME. https://doi.org/10.17646/kome.2015.27

Source records

crossref · retrieved 2026-09-25T01:22:07.456Z