English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The aim of this paper is to identify how researchers perceive the contribution of the peer review process to their own training. Respondents are researchers from all fields of knowledge, with grants from the Brazilian funding agency Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvemeto Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq). The four aspects ingestigated were: a) use of the evaluator comments to improve the manuscript; b) the importance of the arguments presented by the evaluator to justufy his position; c) use of the evaluator comments to improve the manuscript in case of refusal; d) the overall contributions of the peer review process to the researcher's training. Results show that the peer review process is perceived not only as a mechanism to improve science but also to the ongoing improvement of authors, reviewers and editors. It concludes emphazising the need to perceive peer review as an intellectual ontogenetic mechanism, capable of allowing researchers from different areas and trajectories to rethink their research objects and their analysis procedures, with a view to continuous improvement.

A revisão por pares e formação do pesquisador:avaliação do conhecimento científico na perspectiva de uma ontogênese intelectual