ArticleScientometrics
Assessing peer review by gauging the fate of rejected manuscripts: the case of the Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation.
Article in Scientometrics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Misleading readers without lies: understanding spin and its relevance to acupuncture research.Integrative medicine research · 2026Article
- Article
- Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- Insurance Companies Fighting the Peer Review Empire without any Validity: the Case for Addiction and Pain Modalities in the face of an American Drug Epidemic.SEJ surgery and pain · 2018Article
- Establishing Sensible and Practical Guidelines for Desk Rejections.Science and engineering ethics · 2018Article
- Rejected but not dejected: Dealing with an unfavourable decision on a scientific manuscript.Medical journal, Armed Forces India · 2018Review
- Factors influencing the scientific performance of Momentum grant holders: an evaluation of the first 117 research groups.Scientometrics · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper investigates the fate of manuscripts that were rejected from
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.