arXiv (OAI Expanded)
open access
Does Discussion Matter? Interaction Dynamics in Transparent Peer Review
Open peer review is advocated as a way to make review more dialogic, yet evidence on whether it changes participant behavior remains scarce. We compare two transparent review designs: Nature Human Behaviour, an editor-mediated model, and International Conference on Learning Representations 2023, a d
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- The Role of Editorial Boards in Shaping Scholarly Communication: A Large-Scale Mapping of Their Composition and Structure#331600
- Clare: a computer-supported collaborative learning environment based on the thematic structure of scientific text#497448
- HEADS-UP CONVERSATIONAL AUTHORING: A PERCEPTION-INTERACTION-COGNITION FRAMEWORK FOR MOBILE CONTENT CREATION#250840
- Capturing Actions of Communities: Towards Virtual Ethnography and Digital Tools in Researching Organizations and Workplace Learning#475490
- Using informative behavior to increase engagement while learning from human reward#364409
Record · ID 1070989
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive