Abby, M.; Massey, M.D.; Galandiuk, S.; Polk, H.C. 1994. Peer review is an effective screening process to evaluate medical manuscripts. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 105-108.
 
 

 Abramowitz, S.I.; Gomes, B.; Abramowitz, C.V. 1975. Publish or politics? Referee bias in manuscript review. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 5, 187-200.
 
 

 Abt, H. 1987. Are papers by well-known astronomers accepted for publication more readily than other papers? Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 99, 439-441.
 
 

 Abt. H. 2000. Do important papers produce high citation counts? Scientometrics, 48, 65-70.
 
 

 Allen, B.; Qin, J.; Lancaster, F.W. 1994. Persuasive communities: A longitudinal analysis of references in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. Social Studies of Science, 24, 279-310.
 
 

 Anderson, G.C. 1988. Getting science papers published: where it's easy, were it's not. The Scientist, Sept 19, 26-27.
 
 

 Anderson, C. 1993. Pasteur notebooks reveal deception. Science, 259, 1117.
 
 

 Anónimo. Introducción a los comentarios recogidos en la sección Citation Classics hasta 1993. Current Contents.
 
 

 American Psychological Association (APA).  1994. Publication manual of the American Psychological Association, Cuarta Edición, APA: Washington, DC.
 
 

 Armstrong, J.S. 1980. Unintelligible management research and academic prestige. Interfaces, 10, 80-86.
 
 

 Armstrong, J.S. 1982. Barriers to scientific contribution: The author's formula. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 197-199.
 
 

 Armstrong, J.S. 1996. The ombudsman: Management folklore and management science-on portfolio planning, escalation bias and such. Interfaces, 26, 25-55.
 
 

 Armstrong, J.S. 1997. Peer review for journals: Evidence on quality control, fairness, and innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3, 63-84.
 
 

 Aronson, N. 1986. The discovery of resistance. Historical accounts and scientific careers. Isis, 77, 630-646.
 
 

 Astin, H. 1991. Women's and men's perceptions of their contributions to science. En Zuckerman, H., Cole, J.R., Bruer, J.T. (Eds). The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community, W.W. Norton & Company: Nueva York.
 
 

 Atkinson, D.R.; Furlong, M.J.; Wampold, B.E. 1982. Statistical significance, reviewer evaluations and the scientific process: Is there a (statistically) significant relationship? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 189-194.
 
 

 Azbel, M. 1993. Could Columbus have passed peer review? Physics Today, 46, 13-14.
 
 

 Bailar, J.C. 1991. Reliability, fairness, objectivity and other inappropriate goals in peer review. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 137-138.
 
 

 Bailar, J.C.; Patterson, K. 1985. Journal peer review. The need for a research agenda. The New England Journal of Medicine, 312, 654-657.
 
 

 Bakanic, V.; McPhail, C.; Simon, R.J. 1987. The manuscript review and decision-making process. American Sociological Review, 52, 631-642.
 
 

 Bakanic, V.; McPhail, C.; Simon, R.J. 1989. Mixed messages: Referees' comments on the manuscripts they review. The Sociological Quarterly, 30, 639-654.
 
 

 Bakker, P.; Rigter, H. 1985. Editors of medical journals: Who and from where. Scientometrics, 7, 11-22.
 
 

 Barber, B. 1961. Resistance by scientists to scientific discovery. Science, 134, 596-602.
 
 

 Barinaga, M. 1992. Confusion on the cutting edge. Science, 257, 616-619.
 
 

 Barnett, G.A.; Fink, E.L.; Debus, M.B. 1989. A mathematical model of academic citation age. Communication Research, 16, 510-531.
 
 

 Bem, D.J.; Honorton, C. 1994. Does Psi exist? Replicable evidence for an anomalous process of information transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 4-18.
 
 

 Benguigui, G. 1993. Polywater, sociology of an artifact. Social Science Information, 32, 643-667.
 
 

 Beveridge, W.I.B. 1950. The Art of Scientific Investigation, Vintage Books: Nueva York.
 
 

 Beyer, J.M. 1978. Editorial policies and practices among leading journals in four scientific fields. The Sociological Quarterly, 19, 68-88.
 
 

 Beyer, J.; Chanove, R.G.; Fox, W.B. 1995. The review process and the fates of manuscripts submitted to AMJ. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1219-1260.
 
 

 Biggs, M. 1990. The impact of peer review on intellectual freedom. Library Trends, 39, 145-167.
 
 

 Bishop, A.P. 1995. Scholarly journals on the net: A reader's assessment. Library Trends, 43, 544-570.
 
 

 Blank, R.M. 1991. The effects of double-blind versus single-blind reviewing: Experimental evidence from The American Economic Review. American Economic Review, 81, 1041-1067.
 
 

 Boice, R.; Pecker, G.; Zaback, E.; Barlow, E. 1985. A challenge to Peters and Ceci's conclusions with an examination of editorial files for reviewer appropriateness. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8, 744-745.
 
 

 Bonjean, C.M. 1994. A quest for interdisciplinary scholarship. En Simon, R.J. y Fyfe, J.J. (Eds.) Editors as Gatekeepers, 107-146. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers: Boston.
 
 

 Bordons, M.; García-Jover, F.; Barrigón, S. 1992. Bibliometric analysis of publications of Spanish pharmacologists in the SCI 1984-89. Part 1. Scientometrics, 24, 163-177.
 
 

 Bordons, M.; Barrigón, S. 1992. Bibliometric analysis of publications of Spanish pharmacologists in the SCI 1984-89. Part 2. Scientometrics, 25, 425-466.
 

 Boring, E.G. 1964. Cognitive dissonance: Its use in science. Science, 145, 680-685.
 
 

 Bornstein, R.F. 1990. Publication politics, experimenter bias and the replication process in social science research. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 71-81.
 
 

 Bornstein, R.F. 1991. Manuscript review in Psychology: Psychometrics, demand characteristics and an alternative model. The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 12, 429-468.
 
 

 Bozarth, J.D.; Roberts, R.R. 1972. Signifying significant significance. American Psychologist, 27, 774-775.
 
 

 Bott, D.M.; Hargens, L.L. 1991. Are sociologists' publications uncited? Citation rates of journal articles, chapters and books. The American Sociologist, 22, 147-158.
 
 

 Bradley, J.V. 1981. Pernicious publication practices. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 18, 31-34.
 
 

 Braun, T.; Glanzel, W.; Schubert, A. 1989. Some data on the distribution of journal publications types in the science citation index database. Scientometrics, 15, 325-330.
 
 

 Brincones, I.; Otero, J. 1994. Student's conceptions of the top-level structure of Physics texts. Science Education, 78, 171-183.
 
 

 Broad, W.J. 1982. Fraud and the structure of Science. Science, 212, 137-141.
 
 

 Broad, W.; Wade, N. 1982. Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science, Simon and Schuster: Nueva York.
 
 

 Brown, G.W.; Baca, G.M. 1986. A classification of original articles: AJDC 1983 and 1984. American Journal of Diseases in Children, 140, 641-645.
 
 

 Bruin, R.E.; Braam, R.R.; Moed, H.F. 1991. Bibliometric lines in the sand. Nature, 349, 559-562.
 
 

 Brush, S.G. 1990. Prediction and theory evaluation. EOS, 71, 19-33.
 
 

 Brush, S.G. 1993. Prediction and theory evaluation: Subatomic particles. Rivista di Storia della Scienza, Serie 2, 1, 47-152.
 

 Brush, S.G. 1994. Dynamics of theory change: The role of predictions. Proceedings of the 1994 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing: Michigan.
 
 

 Brush, S.G. 1996. The reception of Mendeleev's periodic law in America and Britain. Isis, 87, 595-628.
 
 

 Brush, S.G. 1999a. Dynamics of theory change in chemistry: Part 1. The Benzene problem 1865-1945. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 30, 21-79.
 
 

 Brush, S.G. 1999b. Dynamics of theory change in chemistry: Part 1. Benzene and molecular orbitals 1945-1968. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 30, 263-302.
 
 

 Buchholz, K. 1995. Criteria for the analysis of scientific quality. Scientometrics, 32, 195-218.
 
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1993a. Consolation for the scientist: Sometimes it is hard to publish papers that are later highly-cited. Social Studies of Science, 23, 342-362.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1993b. Not in our Nature. Nature, 361, 488.
  

 Campanario, J.M. 1993c. El control de la comprensión en el aprendizaje de textos científicos. Tesis Doctoral, Universidad de Alcalá: Alcalá de Henares.
 
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1995a. Commentary on influential books and journal articles initially rejected because of negative referees' evaluations. Science Communication, 16, 304-325.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1995b. Using neural networks to study networks of scientific journals. Scientometrics, 33, 23-40.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1996a. The competition for journal space among referees, editors and other authors and its influence on journals' impact factors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47, 184-192.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1996b. Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47, 302-310.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1996c. Using Citation Classics to study the incidence of serendipity in scientific discovery. Scientometrics, 37, 3-24.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1997a. ¿Por qué a los científicos y a nuestros alumnos les cuesta tanto, a veces, cambiar sus ideas científicas?. Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales y Sociales, 11, 31-62.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1997b. The journal scout. The Scientist, 11, 9.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1998a. ¿Quiénes son, qué piensan y qué saben los futuros maestros y profesores de ciencias?: Una revisión de estudios recientes. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 33, 121-140.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1998b. Ventajas e inconvenientes de la Historia de la Ciencia como recurso en la enseñanza de las ciencias. Revista de Enseñanza de la Física, 11, 5-14.
 

 Campanario, J.M. 1999. La ciencia que no enseñamos. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 17, 397-410.

Campanario, J.M. 2002. Rejecting Nobel class papers (en revision).
 

Campanario, J.M.; Cabos, W.; Hidalgo, M.A. 1998. El impacto de la producción científica de la Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. Revista Española de Documentación Científica,21, 402-415.

 

 Campanario, J.M.; Cuerva, J.; Moya, A.; Otero, J.C. 1997. El papel de las estrategias metacognitivas en el aprendizaje de las ciencias Ponencia presentada en el V Congreso Internacional sobre Investigación en la Enseñanza de las Ciencias, Murcia, Septiembre de 1997.
 

 Campanario, J.M.; Otero, J.C. 2000a. Más allá de las ideas previas como dificultades de aprendizaje: las pautas de pensamiento, las concepciones epistemológicas y las estrategias metacognitivas de los alumnos de ciencias. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 18, 155-169.
 

 Campanario, J.M.; Otero, J.C. 2000b. La comprensión de textos de ciencias. En Perales, F.J.; Cañal, P. (Eds.) Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales, Editorial Marfil: Alcoy.
 

 Cano, F.; Julian, S. 1992. Some indicators in Spanish scientific production. Scientometrics, 24, 43-59.
 
 

 Cano, V.; Lind, N.C. 1991. Citation life cycles of ten Citation Classics. Scientometrics, 22, 297-312.
 
 

Cartaña, J. 1989. Lugar de la hipótesis en la enseñanza de las ciencias experimentales a ciclo superior de E.G.B. Actas del X Encuentro de Didáctica de las Ciencias Experimentales, Escuela Universitaria de Magisterio de Ciudad Real: Ciudad Real.
 
 

 Clearly, J.D.; Alexander, B. 1988. Blind vs. non-blind reviews: survey of selected medical journals. Drug Intell Clinical Pharmacology, 22, 601-602.
 
 

 Ceci, S.J.; Peters, D. 1984. How blind is blind review. American Psychologist, 39, 1491-1494.
 
 

 Chalmers, A.F. 1982. ¿Qué es esa cosa llamada ciencia?, Siglo XXI Editores: Madrid.
 
 

 Chalmers, T.C.; Frank, C.S.; Reitman, D. 1990. Minimizing the three stages of publication bias. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1392-1395.
 
 

 Chase, J.M. 1970. Normative criteria for scientific publication. American Sociologist, 5, 262-265.
 
 

 Chew, F.S. 1991. Fate of manuscripts rejected for publication in the AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, 156, 627-632.
 
 

 Christenson, J.A.; Sigelman, L. 1985. Accrediting knowledge: Journal stature and citation impact in social sciences. Current Contents, 38, 21, Septiembre, 5-11.
 
 

 Chubin, D.E. 1985. Misconduct in research: an issue of science policy and practice. Minerva, 23, 175-202.
 
 

 Chubin, D.E.; Porter, A.L.; Rossini, A. 1984. Citation Classic analysis: an approach to characterizing interdisciplinary research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 35, 360-368.
 
 

 Cicchetti, D. 1991. The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 119-135.
 
 

 Clery, D.; Bradley, D. 1994. Underhanded "breakthrough" revealed. Science, 265, 21.
 
 

 Cofer, C.N. 1985. Some reactions to manuscript review from a questionnaire study. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8, 745-746.
 
 

 Cohen, L.H. 1979. Clinical psychologists' judgments of the scientific merit and clinical relevance of psychotherapy outcome research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 421-423.
 
 

 Cohen, J. 1993. HHS: Gallo guilty of misconduct. Science, 259, 168-170.
 
 

 Colaianni, L.A. 1994. Peer review in journals indexed in Index Medicus. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 156-157.
 
 

 Cole, S. 1989. Citation and the evaluation of individual scientists. Trends in the Biochemical Sciences, 14, 9-13.
 
 

 Cole, R.R.; Bowers, T.A. 1973. Research article. Productivity of U.S. journalism faculties. Journalism Quarterly, 50, 246-254.
 
 

 Cole, J.R.; Cole, S. 1973. Social Stratification in Science, University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
 
 

 Comisión Nacional Evaluadora de la Actividad Investigadora 1996. Seis Años de Evaluaciones, MEC: Madrid.
 

 Commoner, B. 1978. Peering at peer review. Hospital Practice, 13, 25-29.
 
 

 Cone, J. 1991. Evaluating scholarly works: How many reviewers? How much anonymity? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 142.
 
 

 Cornejo, J.N. 2000. Sobre la estructura lógica de la Física. Una propuesta de trabajo. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 18, 333-342.
 

 Cotton, P. 1993. Flaws documented, reforms debated at congress on journal peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 270, 2775-2778.
 
 

 Coughlin, E.K. 1989. Concerns about fraud, editorial bias prompt scrutiny of journal practices. The Chronicle of Higher Education. A4-A7.
 
 

 Cox, D.; Gleser, L.; Perlman, M.; Reid, N.; Roeder, K. 1993. Report of the ad hoc committee on double-blind refereeing. Statistical Science, 8, 310-330.
 

 Crandall, R. 1982. Editorial responsibilities in manuscript review. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 207-208.
 
 

 Crandall, R. 1991. What should be done to improve reviewing? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 143.
 
 

 Crane, D. 1967. The gatekeepers of science: Some factors affecting the selection of articles for scientific journals. The American Sociologist, 32, 195-201.
 
 

 Crane, D. 1972. Invisible Colleges: Diffusion of Knowledge in Scientific Communities, University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
 
 

 Cronin, B. 2001. Hyperauthorsip: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52, 558-569.
 
 

 Cummins, L.; Frost, J.P.; Vakil, T.F. 1985. The manuscript review process: A view from the inside on coaches, critics and special cases. En Cummings, L.L., Frost, P.J. (Eds.) Publishing in the Organizational Sciences, 469-508. Irwin: Homewood, IL.
 
 

 Daniel, H.D. 1993. An evaluation of the peer review process at Angewandte Chemie. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 32, 234-238.
 

 Dar, R. 1987. Another look at Meehl, Lakatos and the scientific practices of psychologists. American Psychologist, 42, 145-151.
 
 

 Davidson, R.A. 1986. Source of funding and outcome of clinical trials. Journal of General and Internal Medicine, 1, 155-158.
 
 

 De Bruin, R.E.; Kint, A.; Luwel, M.; Moed, H.F. 1993. A study of research evaluation and planning. The University of Ghent. Research Evaluation, 3, 1-14.
 
 

 Deaton, A.; Guesnerie, R.; Hansen, L.P.; Kreps, D. 1987. Econometrica operating procedures. Econometrica, 55, 204-206.
 
 

 DeBakey, L. 1982. Authorship and manuscript reviewing: The risk of bias. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 208-209.
 
 

 Diamond, A.M. 1986. What is a citation worth?. Journal of Human Resources, 21, 200-215.
 
 

 Dickersin, K. 1990. The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1385-1389.
 
 

 DiTrocchio, F. 1993. Las Mentiras de la Ciencia, Alianza Universidad: Madrid.
 
 

 Doob, L.W. 1994. Editing social psychology. En Simon, R.J, Fyfe,  J.J. (Eds.) Editors as gatekeepers,21-32. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers: Boston.
 
 

 Doré, J.C.; Ojasoo, T.; Okubo, Y.; Durand, T.; Dudognon, G.; Miquel, J.F. 1996. Correspondence factor analysis of the publication patterns of 48 countries over the period 1981-1992. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47, 588-602.
 
 

 Doreian, P. 1994. A measure of standing for citation networks within a wider environment. Information Processing and Management, 30, 21-31.
 

 Dumont, J.E. 1989. The bias of citation. Trends in Biochemical Science TIBS., 14, 327-328.
 
 

Earnshaw, J.J.; Farndon, J.R.; Guillou, P.J.; Johnson, C.D.; Muriel, J.A.; Murray, G.D. 2000. A comparison of reports from referees chosen by authors or journal editors in the peer review process. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 82, 133-135.
 

 Easterbrook, P.J.; Berlin, J.A.; Gopalan; R.; Mattews, D.R. 1991. Publication bias in clinical research. The Lancet, 337, 867-872.
 
 

 Eckberg, D.L. 1991. When nonreliability of reviews indicates solid science. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 145-146.
 
 

 Edwards, G.; Babor, T.F.; Raw; M.; Stockwell, T. 1995. Playing fair: Science, ethics and scientific journals. Addiction, 90, 3-8.
 
 

 Eichorn, D.H.; Van den Boss, G.R. 1985. Dissemination of scientific and professional knowledge. American Psychologist, 40, 1309-1316.
 
 

 Endres, F.F.; Wearden, S.T. 1990. Demographic portrait of journal reviewers. Educator, 45-52.
 

 Epstein, W.M. 1990. Confirmational response bias among social work journals. Science, Technology and Human Values, 15, 9-38.
 
 

 Ernst, E.; Resch, K.L. 1994. Reviewer bias: A blinded experimental study. Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine, 124, 178-182.
 

 Ernst, E.; Kienbacher, T. 1991. Chauvinism. Nature, 352, 560.
 
 

 Eysenck, H.J.; Eysenck, S.B.G. 1992. Peer review: Advice to referees and contributors. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 393-399.
 
 

 Feinstein, A.R. 1991. Construction, consent and condemnation in research on peer review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 44, 339-341.
 
 

 Fernández-Cano, A. 1999. Producción educativa española en el Social Index Citation Index (1988-97). Revista Española de Pedagogía, año 57, núm 214, 509-524.
 

 Ferreiro, L.; Ugena, S. 1992. Citation mechanics in journal covered by the Journal Citation Reports. Scientometrics, 24, 149-162.
 
 

 Feyerabend, P.K. 1974. Contra el Método. Esquema de una Teoría Anarquista del Conocimiento, Ariel: Madrid.
 

 Finke, R.A. 1990. Recommendations for contemporary editorial practices. American Psychologist, 45, 669-670.
 
 

 Fisher, M.; Friedman, M.; Strauss, B. 1994. The effects of blinding on acceptance of research papers by peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 143-146.
 
 

 Fiske, D.W.; Fogg, L. 1990. But the reviewers are making different criticism of my paper! American Psychologist, 45, 591-598.
 
 

 Fitzgerald, D.; Erianne, G. 2002. Managing references the esasy way. The Scientist, January 7, 43-46.
 
 

 Fleiss, J.L. 1982. Deception in the study of the peer-review process. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 210-211.
 

 Forcese, D.P.; Richer, S. 1973. Social Research Methods, Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs.
 
 

 Fox, T. 1965. Crisis in Communication, Athelone Press, University of London: Londres.
 
 

 Franke, R.; Kaul, J. D. 1978. The Hawthorne experiments: First statistical interpretations. American Sociological Review, 43, 623-643.
 
 

 Friedman, P.J. 1990. Correcting the literature following fraudulent publication. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1416-1419.
 

 Frost, P.; Taylor, R. 1995. Partisan perspective. A multiple-level interpretation of the manuscript review process in social science journals. En Cummings, L.L. y Frost, J.P. (Eds.) Publishing in the Organizational Sciences,13-43. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.
 
 

 Fyfe, J.J. 1994. Cops and robbers in academe: Editing Justice Quarterly. En Simon, R.J. y Fyfe, J.J. (Eds.) Editors as Gatekeepers, 59-72. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers: Boston.
 
 

 Gans, J.S.; Shepherd, G.B. 1994. How are the mighty fallen: Rejected classic articles by leading economists. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8, 165-179.
 
 

 Garcia, J. 1981. Tilting at the paper mills of academe. American Psychologist, 36, 149-158.
 
 

 Gardner, M.J., Bond, J. 1990. An exploratory study of statistical assessment of papers published in the British Medical Journal. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1355-1357.
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1955. Citation indexes for Science. Science, 122, 109-110. 

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1979. Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?. Scientometrics, 1, 359-375.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1983. How to use citation analysis for faculty evaluation and when is it relevant?. Part 2. Current Contents, 45, 7 Noviembre, 5-14.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1984. The awards of science: Beyond the Nobel Prize. Part 2. The winners and their most-cited papers. Current Contents, 50, 10 Diciembre, 3-17.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1985a. Origins of Current Contents, ISI and computer-aided information retrieval. How it all began at the Welch Medical Library indexing project. Current Contents, 34, 26 Agosto. 3-9.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1985b. Journal selection for Current Contents: Editorial merit vs. political pressure. Current Contents, 11, 18 Marzo, 3-11.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)

 Garfield, E. 1985c. Uses and misuses of citation frequency. Current Contents, 43, 28 Octubre, 3-9.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1986a. Refereeing and peer review. Part 1. Opinion and conjecture on the effectiveness of refereeing. Current Contents, 31, 4 Agosto, 3-11.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1986b. Refereeing and peer review. Part 2. The research on refereeing and alternatives to the present system. Current Contents, 32, 11 Agosto, 3-12.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

Garfield, E. 1989a. Citation behavior-an aid or a hindrance to information retrieval?. Current Contents, 18, 1 Mayo, 3-8.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1989b. Delayed recognition in scientific discovery: Citation frequency analysis aids the search for case histories. Current Contents, 23, 5 Junio, 3-9.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1990a. The most-cited papers of all time, SCI 1945-1988, Part 1A: The SCI Top 100-Will the Lowry method ever be obliterated?. Current Contents, 7, 12 Febrero, 3-15.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1990b. More delayed recognition. Part 2. From inhibin to scanning electron microscopy. Current Contents, 9, 26 Febrero, 3-9.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1990c. The most-cited papers of all times, SCI 1945-1988. Part 2. The second 100 Citation Classics. Current Contents, 26, 5-17.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1990d. The most-cited papers of all times, SCI 1945-1988. Part 3. Another 100 from the Citation Classics hall of fame. Current Contents, 34, 3-13.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1991. The most-cited papers of all times, SCI 1945-1988. Part 4. The papers ranked 301-400. Current Contents, 21, 5-16.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1993. To what extent is the research literature cited? Lowell Hargens and David Bott examine citation rates in sociology. Current Contents, 5, 3-4.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1994a. The impact factor. Current Contents, 25, 20 Junio, 3-8.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1994b. Scientography: Mapping the tracks of science. Current Contents, 45, 7 Noviembre, 5-11.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 

 Garfield, E. 1994c. Research fronts. Current Contents, 41, 10 Octubre, 3-7.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E. 1996. The significant scientific literature appears in a small core of journals. The Scientist, 10, 13-16.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 
 

 Garfield, E.; Welljams-Dorof, A. 1992. Citation data: their use as quantitative indicators for science and technology evaluation and policy-making. Science and Public Policy, 19, 321-327.

(Disponible en http://garfield.library.upenn.edu)
 

 Garfunkel, J.M.; Ulshen, M.H.; Hamrick, H.J.; Lawson, E.E. 1990. Problems identified by secondary review of accepted manuscripts. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1369-1371.
 
 

 Garfunkel, J.M.; Ulshen, M.H.; Hamrick, H.J.; Lawson, E.E. 1994. Effect of institutional prestige on reviewers' recommendations and editorial decisions. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 137-138.
 
 

 Gibbons, J.D.; Fish, M. 1991. Ranking of Economics faculties and representation on editorial boards of top journals. Journal of Economics Education, 22, 361-372.
 
 

 Gidez, L.I. 1991. The peer review process: Strengths and weaknesses, a survey of attitudes, perceptions and expectations. Serials Librarian, 11, 75-85.
 

 Gilbert, G.N. 1977. Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7, 113-122.
 
 

 Gilmore, J.B. 1991. On forecasting validity and finessing reliability. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 148-149.
 
 

 Gingold, M.P. 1973. L'eau dite anormale: Revue generale. Bulletin de la Societe Chimique de France, 5, 1629-1644.
 

 Glanzel, W.; Schoepflin, U. 1995. A bibliometric study on ageing and reception processes of scientific literature. Journal of Information Science, 21, 37-53.
 

 Glanzel, W.; Schubert, A. 1992. Some facts and figures on highly cited papers in the sciences, 1981-1985. Scientometrics, 25, 373-380.
 

 Glass, G.V. 1982. Meta-analysis: An approach to the synthesis of research results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19, 93-112.
 

 Glenn, N.D. 1976. The journal article review process: Some proposals for change. American Sociologist, 11, 179-185.
 

 Glogoff, S. 1988. Reviewing the gatekeepers: A survey of referees of library journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 39, 400-407.
 

 Goodstein, L.D.; Brazis, K.L. 1970. Psychology of the scientist. Psychological Reports, 27, 835-838.
 

 Gordon, M.D. 1977. Evaluating the evaluators. New Scientist, 73, 342-343.
 

 Gordon, M.D. 1978. Disciplinary differences, editorial practice and the patterning of rejection rates for UK research journals. Journal of Research Communication Studies, 2, 139-159.
 
 

 Gordon, M.D. 1979. Peer review in Physics. Physics Bulletin, 30, 112-113.
 

 Gordon, M. 1982. Citation ranking versus subjective evaluation in the determinants of journal hierarchies in the social sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 33, 55-57.
 
 

 Gorn, G.J. 1982. The effects of music in advertising on choice behavior: A classical conditioning approach. Journal of Marketing, 46, 94-101.
 

 Greenwald, A.G. 1975. Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 1-20.
 

 Grouse, L.D. 1981. The Ingelfinger rule. Journal of the American Medical Association, 245, 375-376.
 

 Guest, A.M. 1994. Gatekeeping among the demographers. En Simon, R.J. y Fyfe, J.J. (Eds.) Editors as Gatekeepers, 85-106. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers: Boston.
 

 Gustafson, B.J.; Rowell, P.M. 1995. Elementary preservice teachers constructing conceptions about learning science, teaching science and the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 589-605.
 

 Halperin, M.R.; Chakrabarti, A.K. 1987. Firm and industry characteristics influencing publications of scientists in large american companies. Research and Development Management, 17, 167-173.
 
 

 Hamermesh, D.S. 1994. Facts and myths about refereeing. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8, 153-163.
 

 Hamilton, D.P. 1990. Publishing by-and for-the numbers. Science, 250, 1331-1332.
 
 

 Hamilton, D.P. 1991. Research papers: Who's uncited now?. Science, 251, 25.
 

 Hammer, D. 1994. Epistemological beliefs in introductory Physics. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 151-183.
 

 Harcum, E.R.; Rosen, E.F. 1993. The Gatekeepers of Psychology: Evaluation of Peer Review by Case History, Praeger: Westport, CT.
 

 Hargens, L.L. 1988. Scholarly consensus and journal rejection rates. American Sociological Review, 53, 139-151.
 

 Hartley, J.P. 1988. Editorial practices in Psychology journals. The Psychologist, 11, 428-430.
 
 

 Hartley, J.P. 1993. In defence of referees. The Psychologist, 6, 200-201.
 
 
 

Hempel, C. 1978. Filosofía de la Ciencia Natural, Alianza Editorial: Madrid.
 
 

 Hernon, P.; Smith, A.; Croxen, M.B. 1993. Publication in College and Research Libraries: Accepted, rejected and published papers, 1980-1991. College and Research Libraries 54, 303-321.

 Holton, G. 1982. Ensayos sobre el Pensamiento Científico en la Epoca de Einstein, Alianza Universidad: Madrid.

 Horrobin, D.F. 1974. Referees and research administrators: Barriers to scientific research? British Medical Journal, 2, 216-218.

 Horrobin, D.F. 1990. The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1438-1441.

 Horton, R. 1996. The Lancet's ombudsman. Lancet, 348, 6.
 

 Hubbard, R.; Armstrong, J.S. 1992. Are null results becoming an endangered species in marketing? Marketing Letters, 3, 127-136.
 

 Hubbard, R.; Vetter, D.E. 1996. An empirical comparison of published replication research in accounting, economics, finance, management and marketing. Journal of Business Research, 35, 153-164.
 

 Hughes, H.M. 1979. Comment. The American Sociologist, 14, 242-243.
 

 Hull, D.L. 1996. A revolutionary philosopher of science. Nature, 382, 203-204.
 
 

 Ingelfinger, F.J. 1974. Peer review in biomedical publication. The American Journal of Medicine, 56, 666-692.

 Izquierdo, M.; Rivera, L. 1997. La estructura y la comprensión de los textos de ciencias. Alambique, 11, 24-33.

 Jacobson, R.L. 1986. Scholars fault journals and college libraries in survey by council of learned societies. Chronicle of Higher Education, 32, 21-23.
 

 Jauch, L.R.; Wall, J.L. 1989. What they do when they get your manuscript: A survey of academy of management reviewer practices. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 157-173.
 

 Judson, H.F. 1994. Structural transformations of the sciences and the end of peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 92-94.
 

 Juhasz, S.; Calvert, E.; Jackson, T.; Kronick, D.A.; Shipman, J. 1975. Acceptance and rejection of manuscripts. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 18, 177-185.
 

 Kalichman, M.W.; Friedman, P.J. 1992. A pilot study of biomedical trainees' perceptions concerning research ethics. Academic Medicine, 67, 769-775.

 Kassirer, J.P. 1992. Do medical journals suppress information. The New England Journal of Medicine, 327, 1238.
 
 

 Kassirer, J.P.; Campion, E.W. 1994. Peer review: Crude and understudied, but indispensable. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 96-97.
 

 Kawano, T.; Kehle, T.J.; Clark, E.; Jenson, W.R. 1993. School Psychology journals: Relationships with related journals and external and internal quality indices. Journal of School Psychology, 31, 407-424.
 

 Kemper, K.J. 1991. Pride and prejudice in peer review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 44, 343-345.
 

 Kerr, S.; Tolliver, J.; Petree, D. 1977. Manuscript characteristics which influence acceptance for management and social science journals. Academy of Management Journal, 20, 132-141.

 Kiessler, C.A. 1991. Confusion between reviewer reliability and wise editorial and funding decisions. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 151-152.
 

 King, J. 1987. A review of bibliometric and other science indicators and their role in research evaluation. Journal of Information Sciences, 13, 261-276.
 

 Kintsch, W. 1985. Text processing: A psychological model. En van Dijk, T.A. (Ed.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Vol. 2, Academic Press: Londres.
 

 Kintsch, W. 1988. The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A Construction-Integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
 

 Klotz, I.M. 1995. Number mysticism in scientific thinking. The Mathematical Intelligencer, 17, 43-51.
 

 Koch-Weser, D.; Yankauer, A. 1993. The authorship and fate of international health papers submitted to the American Journal of Public Health in 1989. American Journal of Public Health, 83, 1618-1620.
 

 Kochan, C.A.; Budd, J.M. 1992. The persistence of fraud in the literature: The Darsee case. Journal of the American Medical Association, 43, 488-493.
 

 Kohn, A. 1988. Falsos Profetas, Pirámide: Madrid.
 

 Koren, G. 1986. A simple way to improve the chances for acceptance of your scientific paper. The New England Journal of Medicine, 315, 1298.
 

 Koshland, D.E. 1987. Fraud in Science. Science, 235, 141.
 

 Krauskopf, M.; Vera, M.I.; Krauskopf, V.; Welljams-Dorof, A. 1995. A citationist perspective on science in Latin America and the Caribe, 1981-1993. Scientometrics, 34, 3-25.
 

 Krimsky, S.; Rothenberg, L.S.; Scott, P.; Kyle, G. 1996. Financial interests of authors in scientific journals: A pilot study of 14 publications. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2, 396-410.
 

 Kuhn, T. 1971. La Estructura de las Revoluciones Científicas, Fondo de Cultura Económica: México.
 

 Kuhn, T.S. 1975. Reflexiones sobre mis críticos. En Lakatos, I.,Musgrave, A. (Eds.) La Crítica y el Desarrollo del Conocimiento, Grijalbo: Barcelona.
 
 

 Laband, D.N. 1985. Publishing favoritism: A critique of department rankings based on quantitative publishing performance. Southern Economic Journal, 52, 510-515.
 

 Laband, D.N. 1990. Is there value-added from the review process in economics? Preliminary evidence from authors. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 105, 341-352.
 
 

 Laband, D.N.; Piette, M.J. 1994a. A citation analysis of the impact of blinded peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 147-148.
 

 Laband, D.N.; Piette, M.J. 1994b. Favoritism versus search of good papers: Empirical evidence regarding the behavior of journal editors. Journal of Political Economy, 102, 194-203.
 

 LaFollette, M.C. 1983. On fairness and peer review. Science, Technology and Human Values, 8, 3-5.
 
 

 LaFollette, M.C. 1992. Stealing Into Print, University of California Press: Berkeley, CA.
 
 

 Lakatos, I. 1983. La Metodología de los Programas de Investigación Científica, Alianza Editorial: Madrid.
 

 Latour, B. 1987. Science in Action, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts.
 

 Lawani, S.M.; Bayer, A.E. 1983. Validity of citation criteria for assessing the influence of scientific publications: new evidence with peer assessment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 34, 59-66.
 

 le Pair, C. 1995. Formal evaluation methods: their utility and limitations. International Forum of Information and Documentation, 20, 16-24.
 

 Lederberg, J. 1978. Digital communications and the conduct of science: The new literacy. Proceedings of the IEEE, 66, 1314-1319.
 

 Legendre, A.M. 1995. Peer review of manuscripts for biomedical journals. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 207, 36-38.
 
 

 León, J.A. 1991. La mejora de la comprensión lectora: un análisis interactivo. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 56, 5-24.
 

 Leydesdorff, L. 1987a. Towards a theory of citation?. Scientometrics, 12, 305-309.
 
 

 Leydesdorff, L. 1987b. Various methods for the mapping of science. Scientometrics, 11, 295-324.
 

 Leydesdorff, L.; Gauthier, E. 1996. The evaluation of national performance in selected priority areas using scientometric methods. Research Policy, 25, 431-450.
 

 Lindsey, D. 1976. Distinction, achievement and editorial board membership. American Psychologist, 31, 799-804.
 

 Lindsey, D.; Lindsey, T. 1978. The outlook of journal editors and referees on the normative criteria of scientific craftsmanship. Quality and Quantity, 12, 45-62.
 

 Lindsey, D. 1977. Participation and influence in publication review proceedings: A reply. American Psychologist, 32, 579-585.
 

 Lindsey, D. 1978. The Scientific Publication System in Social Science: A Study of the Operation of Leading Professional Journals in Psychology, Sociology and Social Work, Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.
 

 Lock, S. 1985a. Letter to P.B.S. Fowler. 4 December 1984. British Medical Journal, 290, 1560.
 

Lock, S. 1985b. A Difficult Balance: Editorial Peer Review in Medicine, Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust: Londres
 

 Lock, S.P. 1991. Should the blinded lead the blinded? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 156-157.
 

 Lock, S.; Smith, J. 1991. What do peer reviewers do? Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1341-1343.

 Loftus, G.R. 1993. A picture is worth a thousand p values: On the irrelevance of hypothesis testing in the microcomputer age. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 25, 250-256.
 

 Lowry, O.H.; Rosebrough, N.J.; Farr, A.L.; Randall, R.J. 1951. Protein measurement with the folin phenol reagent. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 193, 265-275.
 

 Luce, R.D. 1989. A History of Psychology in Autobiography, Volume 8. Stanford University Press: Stanford.
 

 MacRoberts, M.H.; MacRoberts, B.R. 1989. Citation analysis and the science policy arena. Trends in Biochemical Science TIBS., 14, 8-12.
 

 Maddox, J. 1993. Competition and the death of science. Nature, 263-267.
 
 

 Magri, M.H.; Solari, A. 1996. The SCI journal citation reports: A potential tool for study journals?. Scientometrics, 35, 93-117.
 

 Mahoney, M.J. 1977. Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1, 161-175.
 

 Mahoney, M.J. 1979. Psychology of the scientist: An evaluative review. Social Studies of Science, 9, 349-375.
 

 Mahoney, M.J. 1982. Publication, politics and scientific progress. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 220-221.
 

 Mahoney, M.J. 1985. Open exchange and epistemic progress. American Psychologist, 40, 29-39.
 

 Mahoney, M.J. 1990. Bias, controversy, and abuse in the study of the scientific publication system. Science, Technology and Human Values, 15, 50-55.
 

 Mahoney, M.J.; Kazdin, A.E.; Kenigsberg, M. 1978. Getting Published. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 2, 69-70.
 

 Marshall, E. 1995. Suit alleges misuse of peer review. Science, 270, 1912-1914.

 

 Marshall, E. 1992. Intellectual conflicts-boon or bust? Science, 257, 624.
 

 McCutchen, C.W. 1991. Peer review: Treacherous servant, disastrous master. Technology Review, 94, 28-40.
 

 McNutt, R.A.; Evans, A.T.; Fletcher, R.H.; Fletcher, S.W. 1990. The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1371-1374.
 

 Meadows, A.J. 1977. The problem of refereeing. Scientia, 112, 787-794.
 

 Meana, L. 1996. La minirrevolución de Thomas Kuhn. El País, 13 de julio de 1996, p. 14.
 

 Medoff, M. 1989. The rankings of economists. Journal of Economic Education, 20, 405-415.
 

 Melton, A.W. 1962. Editorial. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 553-557.
 

 Méndez, A.; Gómez, I. 1986. The Spanish scientific productivity through eight international databases. Scientometrics, 10, 207-219.
 

 Méndez, A.; Salvador, P. 1992. The application of scientometric indicators to the Spanish Scientific Research Council. Scientometrics, 24, 61-78.
 

 Menger, F.M., Haim, A. 1992. Struggles to correct published errors. Nature, 359, 666-668.
 

 Merton, R.K. 1957. Priorities in scientific discovery. American Sociological Review, 22, 635-659.
 

 Merton, R.K. 1985. La Sociología de la Ciencia, Alianza Editorial: Madrid.
 

 Metoyer-Duran, C. 1993. The readability of published, accepted, and rejected papers appearing in College and Research Libraries. College and Research Libraries, 54, 517-526.
 

 Micceri, T. 1989. The unicorn, the normal curve and other improbable creatures. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 156-166.
 

 Michels, R. 1995. Peer review. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 76, 217-221.
 

 Miller, D.J.; Hersen, M. 1992. Research Fraud in the Behavioral and Biomedical Sciences, John Wiley and Sons: Nueva York.
 

 Mindick, B. 1982. When we practice to deceive: The ethics of a metascientific inquiry. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 226-227.
 

 Moed, H.F.; Burger, W.J.M.; Frankfort, F.G.; Van Raan, A.F.J. 1985. The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance. Research Policy, 14, 131-149.
 
 
 

 Moed, H.F.; Van Leeuwen, T.N. 1995. Improving the accuracy of Institute for Scientific Information's journal impact factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46, 461-467.
 
 

 Moosy, J.; Moosy, Y.R. 1985. Anonymous authors, anonymous referees: an editorial exploration. Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology, 44, 225-228.
 
 

 Moravcsik, M.J. 1988. The limits of science and the scientific method. Research Policy, 17, 293-299.
 

 Morgan, P.D. 1984. Anonymity in medical journals. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 131, 1007-1008.
 
 

 Morrison, D.R.O. 1993. The rise and fall of the 17-keV neutrino. Nature, 366, 29-32.
 

 Murphy, T.M.; Utts, J.M. 1994. A retrospective analysis of peer review at Physiologia Plantarum. Physiologia Plantarum, 92, 535-542.
 
 

 Murray, G.D. 1988. The task of a statistical referee. British Journal of Surgery, 75, 664-667.
 
 

 Nagpaul, P.S.; Sharma, L. 1995. Science in the eighties: A typology of countries based on inter-field priorities. Scientometrics, 34, 263-283.
 
 

 NAS-USA 1994. On Being A Scientist. Responsible Conduct in Research, National Academy of Sciences: Washington.
 
 

 Navarro, F.A. 1999. Reference inaccuracy: are articles cited without being read? Journal of Information Science, 25, 423-424.
 
 

 Neal, L. 1994. Explorations in Economic History. En Simon, R.J. y Fyfe, J.J. (Eds.) Editors as Gatekeepers, 73-84. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers: Boston.
 
 

 Nederhof, A.J.; Van Raan, A.F.J. 1989. A validation study of bibliometric indicators: the comparative performance of cum laude doctorates in chemistry. Scientometrics, 17, 427-435.
 
 

 Nederhof, A.J.; Zwaan, R.A.; De Bruin, R.E.; Dekker, P.J. 1989. Assessing the usefulness of bibliometric indicators for the humanities and the social and behavioral sciences: A comparative study. Scientometrics, 15, 423-435.
 
 

 Nelson, K. 1982. Reliability, bias, or quality: What is the issue? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 229.
 

 Newcombe, R.G. 1987. Towards a reduction in publication bias. British Medical Journal, 295, 656-659.
 
 

 Nissani, M. 1995. The plight of the obscure innovator in science: A few reflections on Campanario's note. Social Studies of Science, 25, 165-183.
 
 

 Noma, E. 1982. An improved method for analyzing square scientometric transaction matrices. Scientometrics, 4, 297-316.
 
 

 Nylenna, M.; Riss, P; Karlsson, Y. 1994. Multiple blinded reviews of the same two manuscripts. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 149-151.
 

 Olby, R. 1994. The Path to the Double Helix: The Discovery of DNA, Dover Publications: Nueva York.
 
 

 Otero, J.C. 1990. Variables cognitivas y metacognitivas en la comprensión de textos científicos: el papel de los esquemas y el control de la propia comprensión. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 8, 17-22.
 
 

 Over, R. 1982. What is the source of bias in peer review? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 229-230.
 
 

 Palermo, D.S. 1982. Biases, decisions and auctorial rebuttal in the peer-review process. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 230-231.
 
 

 Parmley, W.W. 1995. Peer review or poor review? Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 25, 1470-1471.
 
 

 Patterson, S.C. 1994. The itch to publish in Political Science. En Simon, R.J. y Fyfe, J.J. (Eds.) Editors as Gatekeepers, 3-20. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers: Boston.
 
 

 Peritz, B.C. 1995. On the association between journal circulation and impact factor. Journal of Information Science, 21, 63-67.
 
 

 Perlman, D. 1982. Reviewer "bias": Do Peters and Ceci protest too much? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 231-232.
 

 Pestaña, A. 1992. Spanish performance in life sciences. A comparataive appraisal of the scientific production of Spain and five other countries in 1989. Scientometrics, 24, 95-114.
 
 

 Peters, D.P.; Ceci, S.J. 1982a. Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 187-195.

 Peters, D.P.; Ceci, S.J. 1982b. Peer-review research: Objections and obligations. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 246-252.
 

 Peters, H.P.F.; van Raan, F.J. 1994. On determinants of citation scores: A case study in chemical engineering. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45, 39-49.
 
 

 Pfeffer, J.; Leong, A.; Strehl, K. 1977. Paradigm development and particularism: Journal publication in three scientific disciplines. Social Forces, 55, 938-951.
 
 

 Pfeifer, M.P.; Snodgrass, G.L. 1990. The continued use of retracted invalid scientific literature. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1420-1423.
 

 Pipke, I. 1984. The gatekeepers: A multivariate study of accepted and rejected adult education research conference abstracts 1978-80. Adult Education Quarterly, 34, 71-84.
 
 

 Popper, K.R. 1967. La Lógica de la Investigación Científica, Tecnos: Madrid.
 

 Porlán, R. 1994. Las concepciones epistemológicas de los profesores: el caso de los estudiantes de Magisterio. Investigación en la Escuela, 22, 67-84.
 
 

 Praia, J.; Cachapuz, F. 1994. Un análisis de las concepciones acerca de la naturaleza del conocimiento científico de los profesores portugueses de la enseñanza secundaria. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 12, 350-354.
 
 

 Pravdic, N.; Aganovic-Boras, A.; Kritovac, D. 1988. In search of a "non-citation index" indicator for scientific activity assessment in less developed countries. Case study of Croatia/Yugoslavia. Scientometrics, 14, 111-125.
 
 

 Prescott, S.; Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1977. Institutional status and publication rates in professional journals. Quarterly Journal of Ideology, 1, 30-37.
 
 

 Presser, S. 1982. Reviewer reliability: Confusing random error with systematic error or bias. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 234-235.
 
 

 Pressman, S. 1994. Simultaneous multiple journal submissions: The case against. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 53, 315-334.
 
 

 Price, D.J.S. 1986. Little science, big science and beyond, Columbia University Press: Nueva York.
 
 

 Ramírez, A.M.; García, E.O.; Del Río, J.A. 2000. Renormalized impact factor. Scientometrics, 47, 3-9.
 

 Ravetz, J.R. 1971. Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems, Clarendon Press: Oxford.
 
 

 Relman, A.S. 1978. Are we a filter or a sponge? The New England Journal of Medicine, 299, 197.
 
 

 Rennie, D. 1993. More peering into editorial peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 270, 2856-2858.
 
 

 Rhoades, L. 1995. Consequences of Whistleblowing for the Whistleblower in Misconduct in Science Cases, Research Triangle Institute: Washington.
 
 

 Rice, R.E.; Borgman, C.L.; Bednarski, D.; Hart, P.J. 1989. Journal-to-journal citation data: Issues of validity and reliability. Scientometrics, 15, 257-282.
 
 

 Riggs, J.E. 1995. Priority, rivalry and peer review. Journal of Child Neurology, 10, 255-256.
 
 

 Roberts, L. 1991. The rush to publish. Science, 251, 260-263.
 
 

 Roberts, J.C.; Fletcher R.H.; Fletcher, S.W. 1994. Effects of peer review and editing on the readability of articles published in Annals of Internal Medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 119-121.
 
 

 Robin, E.D.; Burke, C.M. 1987. Peer review in medical journals. Chest, 2, 252-255.
 

 Romanelli, E. 1995. Becoming a reviewer. Lessons somewhat painfully learned. En Cummings, L.L., Frost, P.J., Publishing in the Organizational Sciences, 195-202. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.
 

 Rosenblatt, A.; Kirk, S.A. 1980. Recognition of authors in blind review of manuscripts. Journal of Social Service Research, 3, 383-394.
 
 

 Roshenthal, R. 1982. Reliability and bias in peer-review practices. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 235-236.
 
 

 Roshenthal, R. 1979. The "file drawer problem" and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638-641.
 
 

 Rothman, K.J. 1993. Conflict of interest. The new McCarthyism in science. Journal of the American Medical Association, 269, 2872-2874.
 
 

 Rotton, J.; Levitt, M. 1993. Citation impact, rejection rates and journal value. American Psychologist, 48, 911-912.
 
 

 Rousseau, R.; Van Hooydonk, G. 1996. Journal production and journal impact factors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47, 775-780.
 
 

 Rowney, J.A.; Zenisek, T.J. 1980. Manuscript characteristics influencing reviewers' decisions. Canadian Psychology, 21, 17-21.
 
 

 Roy, R. 1985. Funding science: The real defects of peer review and an alternative to it. Science, Technology and Human Values, 10, 73-81.
 
 

 Ryan, A.G.; Aikenhead, G.S. 1992. Students' preconceptions about the epistemology of science. Science Education, 76, 559-580.
 
 

 Saksena, S.; Fisher, J.D.; Madan, N; Krause, B. 1995. Is justice blind? Blinded and unblinded abstract reviews. PACE, 18, 759-764.
 
 

 Salsburg, D.S. 1985. The religion of statistics as practiced in medical journals. American Statistician, 39, 220-223.

 Sánchez-Ron, J.M. 1988. Usos y abusos de la historia de la Física en la enseñanza. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 6, 179-188.
 

 Sánchez-Ron, J.M. 1992. El Poder de la Ciencia, Alianza Editorial: Madrid.
 
 

 Sánchez, G.; Valcárcel, M.V. 1993. Diseño de unidades didácticas en el área de ciencias experimentales. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 11, 33-44.
 
 

 Scanlan, B.P. 1991. Passengers, drivers and traffic cops on peer review road. Serials Librarian, 19, 71-73.
 
 

 Scardamalia, M.; Bereiter, C. 1984. Development of strategies in text processing. En Mandl, H., Stein, N.L., Trabasso, T. (Eds.) Learning and Comprehension of Text, Lawrence Erlmbaum: Hillsdale, New Jersey.
 
 

 Scarr, S. 1982. Anosmic peer review: A rose by another name is evidently not a rose. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 237-238.
 
 

 Schaeffer, D.L. 1970. Do APA journals play professional favorites? American Psychologist, 25, 362-365.
 
 

 Schank, R.C. 1980. Language and memory. Cognitive Science, 4, 243-284.
 
 

 Scharschmidt, B.F.; DeAmicis, A.; Bacchetti, P.; Held, M.J. 1994. Chance, concurrence and clustering: Analysis of reviewers' recommendations on 1000 submissions to the Journal of Clinical Investigation. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 93, 1877-1880.
 
 

 Scherer, R.W.; Dickersin, K.; Langenberg, P. 1994. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 158-162.
 
 

 Schonemann, P.D. 2001. Better never than late: Peer review and the preservation of prejudice. Ethical Human Sciences and Services, 3, 7-20.
 

 Schulman, K., Sulmasy; D.P.; Roney, D. 1994. Ethics, economics and the publication policies of major medical journals. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 154-155.
 
 

 Seglen, P.O. 1989. From bad to worse: Evaluation by journal impact. Trends in Biochemical Science, TIBS, 14, 326-327.
 
 

 Seglen, P.O. 1992. The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43, 628-638.
 
 

 Seglen, P.O. 1994. Causal relationship between article citedness and journal impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45, 1-11.
 
 

 Shamblin, D.H. 1970. Prestige and the sociology establishment. American Sociologist, 5, 154-156.
 
 

 Shapiro, S. 1985. The decision to publish. Ethical dilemmas. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 38, 365-372.
 
 

 Sharp, D. 1990. What can and should be done to reduce publication bias? Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1390-1391.
 
 

 Sherrell, D.L.; Hair, F.; Griffin, M. 1989. Marketing academicians perceptions of ethical research and publishing behavior. Journal of Academic Marketing Science, 17, 315-324.
 

 Siebert, G. 1989. Citapeer or peercit?. Trends in Biochemical Science TIBS, 14, 328.
 
 

 Siegelman, S.S. 1991. Assassins and Zealots: Variations in peer review. Radiology, 178, 637-642.
 
 

 Siegfried, J.J. 1994. Trends in institutional affiliation of authors who publish in the three leading general interest economics journals. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 34, 375-386.
 
 

 Sikorav, J.L. 1991. The utility of scientific papers. Scientometrics, 21, 49-68.
 
 

 Simon, R.J.; Bakanic, V.; McPhail, C. 1986. Who complains to journal editors and what happens. Sociological Inquiry, 56, 259-271.
 
 

 Singer, B.D. 1989. The criterial crisis of the academic world. Social Inquiry, 59, 125-143.
 
 

 Small, H. 1993. Macro-level changes in the structure of co-citation clusters: 1983-1989. Scientometrics, 26, 5-20.
 
 

 Smith, K.; Laband, D.N. 1995. The role of editors' professional connections in determining which papers get published: Evidence from accounting research journals. Accounting Perspectives, 1, 21-30.
 

 Soffer, A. 1987. Proponent view. Chest, 91, 252-257.
 
 

 Sokal, A. 1996. Transgressing the boundaries: Towards a transformative hermeneutics of quantum gravity. Social Text, 46/47, 217-252.
 
 

 Spencer, N.J.; Hartnett, J.; Mahoney, J. 1986. Problems with reviews in the standard editorial practice. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 1, 21-36.
 
 

 Stent, G.S. 1972. Prematurity and uniqueness in scientific discovery. Scientific American, 227, 84-93.
 

 Sterling, T. 1970. Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance or vice versa. En Morrison, D.; Henkel, R. (Eds.) The Significance Tests Controversy,295-300. Alding: Chicago.
 
 

 Sternberg, R.J. 1985. Tacit agreements between authors and editors. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8, 746-747.
 
 

 Stewart, W.W.; Feder, N. 1987. The integrity of the scientific literature. Nature, 325, 207-214.
 
 

 Stinchcombe, A.; Ofshe, R.J. 1969. On journal editing as a probabilistic process. The American Sociologist, 4, 116-117.
 

 Stossel, T.P. 1985. Reviewer status and review quality: Experience of the Journal of Clinical Investigation. The New England Journal of Medicine, 312, 658-659.
 
 

 Stricker, L.J. 1991. Disagreement among journal reviewers: No cause for undue alarm. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 163-164.
 
 

 Taubes, G. 1993. Publication by electronic mail takes Physics by storm. Science, 259, 1246-1248.
 
 

 Taubes, G. 1994. Peer review in cyberspace. Science, 266, 967.
 
 

 Tax, S.; Rubinstein, R.A. 1982. Responsibility in reviewing and research. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 238-240.
 
 

 Thagard, P. 1993. Cognitive Revolutions, Princeton University Press: Princeton, New Jersey.
 
 

 Thelen, M.H.; DiLorenzo, T.M. 1992. Academic Pressures, En Miller, D.J.; Hersen, H. (Eds.) Research Fraud in the Behavioral and Biomedical Sciences, John Wiley and Sons: Nueva York.
 
 

 Tijssen, R.J.W.; Van Raan, F.J. 1990. Net citation balances: A measure of influence between scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41, 298-304.
 
 

 Toulmin, S. 1972. Human Understanding, Princeton University Press: Princeton, N.J.
 
 

 Toulmin, S. 1977. La Comprensión Humana, Alianza Universidad: Madrid.
 
 

 Tuckman, H.H.; Leahey, J. 1975. What is an article worth? Journal of Political Economy, 83, 951-967.
 
 

 van Dijk, T.A.; Kintsch, W. 1983. Strategies of Discourse Comprehension, Academic Press: Nueva York.
 
 

 van Leeuwen, T.N.; Moed, H.F.; Reedijk, J. 1999. Critical comments on Institute for Scientific Information impact factors: a sample of inorganic molecular chemistry journals. Journal of Information Science, 25, 489-498.
 
 

 van Oostendorp, H.; Otero, J.C.; Campanario, J.M. 2002. Conditions of updating during reading. En Louwerse, M., van Peer, W. (Eds.) Thematics: Interdisciplinary Studies. Series on Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, John Benjamins: Londres.
 
 

 Van Heerden, J.H.; Hoogstraten, J. 1978. Significance as a determinant of interest in scientific research. European Journal of Social Psychology, 8, 141-143.
 
 

 Van Hooydonk, G. 1995. Cost and citation data for 5399 scientific journals in connection with journal price-setting, copyright laws and the use of bibliometric data for project review. The Serials Librarian, 27, 45-58.
 
 

 Van Raan, A.F.J.; Tijssen, R.J.W. 1993. The neural net of neural network research. Scientometrics, 26, 169-192.
 
 

 Villagrá, A. 1992. Scientific production of Spanish universities in the fields of social sciences and language. Scientometrics, 24, 3-19.
 
 

 Vinkler, P. 1987. A quasi-quantitative citation model. Scientometrics, 12, 47-72.
 
 

 Vinkler, P. 1988. An attempt of surveying and classifying bibliometric indicators for scientometric purposes. Scientometrics, 13, 239-259.
 
 

 Wade, N. 1981. The Nobel Duel, Anchor Press: Nueva York.
 
 

 Wadman, M. 1996. Drug company links test journal's policy. Nature, 383, 6.
 

 Warner, W.K.; Eberley, S.; Johnson, B.L.; Albrecht, S.L. 1985. Discriminants of editorial decision outcomes. Rural Sociology, 50, 614-625.
 
 

 Watson, J. 1970. La Doble Hélice, Plaza y Janés: Madrid.
 

 Weinstein, D. 1979. Fraud in Science. Social Science Quarterly, 59, 639-652.
 

 Weisse, A.B. 1986. Say it isn't no: Positive thinking and the publication of medical research. Hospital Practice, (Marzo), 23-25.
 
 

 Weller, A.C. 1991. Potential bias in editorial peer review: A study of U.S. Medical journals. Serials Librarian, 19, 95-103.
 
 

 White, H.D. 2001. Authors as citers over time, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52, 87-108.
 

 Wilkes, A.L.; Leatherbarrow, M. 1988. Editing episodic memory following the identification of error. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40A,361-387.
 
 

Willis, C.L.; McNamee, S.J. 1990. Social networks of science and patterns of publication in leading sociology journals, 1960 to 1985. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 11, 363-381.
 
 

 Wilson, J.D. 1978. Peer review and publication: Presidential address before the seventieth annual meeting of the American Society for Clinical Investigation, San Francisco, California, 30 April 1978. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 67, 1697-1701.
 
 

 Wilson, W.A. 1982. Research on peer-review practices: Problems of interpretations, application, and propriety. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 242-243.
 
 

 Wolff-Michael, R. 1994. Physics students' epistemologies and views about knowing and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 5-30.
 
 

 Wrege, C.D.; Perroni, A.G. 1974. Taylor's Pig-Tale: A historical analysis of Frederick W. Taylor's pig-iron experiments. Academy of Management Journal, 17, 6-27.
 
 

 Wright, R.D. 1970. Truth and its keepers. New Scientist, 45, 402-404.
 
 

 Yankauer, A. 1982. Editor's report-Peer review again. American Journal of Public Health, 27, 239-240.
 
 

 Yankauer, A. 1991a. How blind is blind review? American Journal of Public Health, 81, 843-845.
 
 

 Yankauer, A. 1991b. Who are the peer reviewers and how much do they review? Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1338-1340.
 
 

 Yoels, W.C. 1971. Destiny or dynasty: doctoral origins and appointment patterns of editors of the American Sociological Review, 1948-1968. American Sociologist, 6, 134-139.
 
 

 Yoels, W.C. 1974. The structure of scientific fields and the allocation of editorships on scientific journals: some observations on the politics of knowledge. The Sociological Quarterly, 15, 264-276.
 
 

 Yotopoulos, P.A. 1961. Institutional affiliation of the contributors to three professional journals. American Economic Review, 51, 665-670.
 
 

 Ziman, J. 1968. Public Knowledge: The Social Dimension of Science, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
 
 

 Zsindely, S.; Schubert, A.; Braun, T. 1982. Citation patterns of editorial gatekeepers in international chemistry journals. Scientometrics, 4, 69-76.
 
 

 Zsindely, S.; Schubert, A. 1989. Editors-in-Chief of medical journals: Are they experts, authorities, both or neither? Communication Research, 16, 695-700.
 

 Zuckerman, H. 1977. Scientific Elite, The Free Press: Nueva York.
 
 

 Zuckerman, H. 1987. Citation analysis and the complex problem of intellectual influence. Scientometrics, 12, 329-338.
 
 

 Zuckerman, H.; Merton, R.K. 1971. Patterns of evaluation in science: institutionalization, structure and functions of the referee system. Minerva, 9, 66-100.