ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
What was that say
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

TheWebConf 2020 Tutorial on Fairness and Bias in Peer Review and other Sociotechnical Intelligent Systems (Part II on Peer Review) (Papers: Nihar B. Shah & Zachary Lipton | June 2020)

Posted by Dr Gary Allen in on October 26, 2020
Keywords: , , , ,

The Linked Original Item was Posted On June, 14 2020 11:22:10

Red box with "PEER REVIEW" written on the side and papers stuffed in the top slot

Abstract
Peer review is the backbone of scholarly research, but it faces a number of challenges pertaining to bias and unfairness. There is an urgent need to improve peer review. This TheWebConf tutorial (part 2) discusses several problems, empirical studies, proposed solutions, and open problems in this domain. This document serves to provide a summary and references for the tutorial.

Nihar B. Shah, Zachary Lipton:
SIGMOD 2020 Tutorial on Fairness and Bias in Peer Review and Other Sociotechnical Intelligent Systems. SIGMOD Conference 2020: 2637-2640
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~nihars/tutorials/TheWebConf2020/peerreview_summary_refs_TheWebConf2020.pdf

Related Reading

Getting Started as a Peer Reviewer (May 2019)

Peer Review (NHMRC An Australian Code (2018) good practice guide | August 2019)

A peer review card exchange game (Papers: Ružica Tokalićb & Ana Marušić | August 2018)

RePAIR consensus guidelines: Responsibilities of Publishers, Agencies, Institutions, and Researchers in protecting the integrity of the research record (Papers: Collaborative Working Group from the conference “Keeping the Pool Clean… | December 2018)

Tips for negotiating the peer-reviewed journal publication process as an early-career researcher – LSE Impact Blog (Margaret K. Merga, et al | November 2018)

Ten considerations for open peer review (Papers: Birgit Schmidt, et al |

Career advice: how to peer review a paper – THE (Sophie Inge | February 2018)

(COPE) Core practices

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

Handbook of Best Practices in Peer Review Published (Guidance)

Related Links

Compiled here are links, downloads and other resources relating to research integrity and human research ethics. more…

Resources Menu

Four hands solving a jigsaw against the sun blazing out of a cloudy sky

Research Integrity

Human Research Ethics

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in