Cited by 10Publishing and Scholarly CommunicationAcademic Writing and PublishingAcademic Publishing and Open Access

Awards for the best Journal of Applied Polymer Science Referees during 2011

Open access
Tonzani, Stefano·2012·Journal of Applied Polymer Science

Abstract

Peer review is the very foundation of scientific journals, and a scientific publication is only as good as the referees that it can source through the scientific community to evaluate the papers submitted by authors from all over the world. At the Journal of Applied Polymer Science, we are very fortunate to have the ear of a community of outstanding scientists, both in academia and industry, who truly care for the advancement of the science and technology of polymers, and spend their time and effort in ensuring the quality of each and every contribution. And there are a lot of contributions: as the largest peer-reviewed publication in the field, the Journal of Applied Polymer Science screens several thousand papers a year, and of course, this would be impossible without the help of a large number of referees, as we strive to deliver at least two reports per article. Among these large numbers of great referees, there are many truly outstanding ones, and it is my pleasure to announce the start of a yearly feature of the journal: an award for the best referees of the year. All members of the Advisory Board of the Journal of Applied Polymer Science and their coworkers are excluded from this award. Of course, the criteria one could use to select such a group are as many as the referees themselves: number of papers refereed during the year, depth of feedback, help given to the editors in particularly tricky cases, such as suspected scientific fraud. We have decided to use a mix of all of these criteria and to select a group of six referees who, we feel, have gone above and beyond the call of duty, during 2011, to help the Journal of Applied Polymer Science in its mission to publish high-quality content. The six scientists nominated for this year are as follows: (1) Ramin Khajavi, of Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran; (2) Yutaka Kobayashi, of Advanced Composites, Inc., Sidney, OH; (3) Ning Luo, formerly at BioBased Technologies, Fayetteville, AR; (4) Long Yu, of CSIRO, Melbourne, Australia; (5) Yuan Yang, of the Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO; (6) Claudio Migliaresi, of the University of Trento, Trento, Italy It is our pleasure to award these six referees a certificate that they will receive by mail. It is an honor and a privilege to be able to exchange comments every day with such impressive and attentive scientists. Congratulations to all the winners for this year, as well as to all our other truly excellent referees for upholding the quality of scientific research in the field, as well as helping other scientists improve their work, so that it can be more interesting, more complete, and more accessible.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/app.38085

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tonzani, S.
Corresponding author
Tonzani, Stefano
Venue
Journal of Applied Polymer Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-06-18
Volume
126
Issue
1
Pages
1-1
ISSN
  • 0021-8995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-4628
OpenAlex
W2054967558
Cited by
10
References
0
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
15.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Applied Polymer Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Publishing and Scholarly Communication
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
Keywords
peer review, scientific publishing quality, reviewer recognition, editorial process

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review