Peer reviewers need a code of conduct too
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Toxic reviews may hinder scientific progress.
“This, in turn, may hinder scientific progress (Beaumont 2019;Gerwing et al. 2020).”
From Benchmark on Peer Review Toxic Detection: A Challenging Task with a New Dataset (2025) · cites this paper as Beaumont 2019
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Benchmark on Peer Review Toxic Detection: A Challenging Task with a New Dataset
Luo, M., Peterson, B., Gan, R., Ramalingame, H., Gangrade, N., Dimarogona, A., Banerjee, I., & Howard, P. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.01676 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Beaumont, L. J.
- Affiliations
- Macquarie University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Beaumont, Linda J.
- ORCID
- Beaumont, Linda J.
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2019-08-20
- Volume
- 572
- Issue
- 7770
- Pages
- 439-439
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- OpenAlex
- W2969601828
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 8.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Publishing and Scholarly Communication
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Keywords
- peer review, codes of conduct, scholarly publishing
- MeSH terms
- Formative Feedback, Humans, Mental Health, Research Personnel, Peer Review, Research, Codes of Ethics, Bullying
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
