Reference
- Chesterton, G. K. (1910). The Fear of the Past. Part I, Chapter 4. In G. K. Chesterton (Auth.), What’s wrong with the world (pp. 28–34). New York, NY: Dodd, Mead and Co.
Further reading
- Alexandrov, A. V., & Hennerici, M. G. (2007). Writing good abstracts. Cerebrovascular Diseases, 23(4), 256–259. doi:10.1159/000098324
- American Psychological Association. (2010). Publications manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, D.C.: Author.
- Andrews, R. (2005). Models of argumentation in educational discourse. Text, 25(1), 107–127. doi:10.1515/text.2005.25.1.107
- Aristotle. (1992). The art of rhetoric. Trans. Lawson-Tancred, H. New York, NY: Penguin.
- Augusto, L. M. (2017). Logical consequences. Theory and applications: An introduction. London, UK: College Publications.
- Barker-Plummer, D., Barwise, J., & Etchemendy, J. (2011). Language, proof and logic (2nd ed.). Stanford, USA: CSLI Publications.
- Batty, C., & Sinclair, J. (2014). Peer-to-peer learning in the higher degree by research context: A creative writing case study. New Writing, 11(3), 335–346. doi:10.1080/14790726.2014.932814
- Belcher, W. L. (2009). Writing your journal article in 12 weeks: A guide to academic publishing success. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
- Benesch, S. (2001). Critical english for academic purposes: Theory, politics and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Benos, D., Kirk, K., & Hall, J. (2003). How to review a paper. Advances in Physiology Education, 27(2), 47–52. doi:10.1152/advan.00057.2002
- Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2010). Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 2–20. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2010.01.001
- Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102–118. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004
- Blanchette, P. A. (2001). Logical Consequence. In L. Goble (Ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Philosophical Logic (pp. 115–135). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
- Bordage, G. (2001). Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: The strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Academic Medicine, 76(9), 889–896.
- Boscolo, P., & Mason, L. (2001). Writing to learn, writing to transfer. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Eds.), Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 83–104). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- Brackbill, Y., & Korten, F. (1970). Journal reviewing practices: Authors’ and APA members’ suggestions for revision. American Psychologist, 25(10), 937–940. doi:10.1037/h0029927
- Bruning, R., & Horn, C. (2000). Developing motivation to write. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 25–37. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3501_4
- Bryson, B. (2001). Troublesome words. London, UK: Viking.
- Butterfield, E. C., Hacker, D. J., & Albertson, L. R. (1996). Environmental, cognitive, and metacognitive influences on text revision: Assessing the evidence. Educational Psychology Review, 8(3), 239–297. doi:10.1007/BF01464075
- Chesterton, G. K. (1910). What’s wrong with the world. New York, NY, Dodd, Mead and Co.
- Clark, I. L. (1998). The genre of argument. Boston, MA: Thomson Heinle.
- Clark, T., & Wright, M. (2007). Reviewing journal rankings and revisiting peer reviews: Editorial perspectives. Journal of Management Studies, 44(4), 612–621. doi:10.1111/joms.2007.44.issue-4
- Coffin, C. (2006). Historical discourse: The language of time, cause and evaluation. London, UK: Continuum.
- Coffin, C., Curry, M. J., Goodman, S., Hewings, A., Lillis, T. M., & Swann, J. (2003). Teaching academic writing: A toolkit for higher education. London, UK: Routledge.
- Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2006). Business research methods (9th ed.). New York, NY: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
- Daft, R. (1995). Why I recommended that your manuscript be rejected and what you can do about it. In L. Cummings & P. Frost (Eds.), Publishing in the Organizational Sciences (2nd ed., pp. 164–182). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- Damer, T. E. (2013). Attacking Faulty Reasoning (7th ed.). Boston. MA, Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.
- Day, R. A. (1998). How to write and publish a scientific paper. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Devers, K. J., & Frankel, R. M. (2001). Getting qualitative research published. Education for Health, 14(1), 109–117. doi:10.1080/13576280010021888
- Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the use of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern in studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. doi:10.1002/sce.20012
- Feldman, D. C. (2004). The devil is in the details: Converting good research into publishable articles. Journal of Management, 30(1), 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.jm.2003.09.001
- Fernsten, L. (2006). Peer response: Helpful pedagogy or hellish event. The WAC Journal, 17(1), 33–41.
- Gass, M. A., & Gillis, H. L. (2010). ENHANCES: Adventure therapy supervision. Journal of Experiential Education, 33(1), 72–89. doi:10.1177/105382591003300106
- Gluck, R., Draisma, K., Fulcher, J., & Worthy, M. (2004). Draw-Write-Talk. In K. Deller-Evans & P. Zeegers (Eds.), In the future … Refereed proceedings of the 2003 biennial language and academic skills in higher education conference (pp. 109–116). Adelaide, SA: Student Learning Centre, Flinders University.
- Govier, T. (2005). A practical study of argument (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
- Groopman, J. (2007). How doctors think. Carlton North, Australia: Scribe Publications.
- Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). UK, Arnold: London.
- Hanson, W. (1997). The concept of logical consequence. The Philosophical Review, 106(3), 365–409. doi:10.2307/2998398
- Harrison, D. (2002). From the editors: Obligations and obfuscations in the review process. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 1079–1084. doi:10.5465/amj.2002.9265944
- Hartley, J. (2005). To attract or to inform: What are titles for? Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 35(2), 203–213. doi:10.2190/NV6E-FN3N-7NGN-TWQT
- Hayes, J. R. (2006). New directions in writing theory. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 28–40). New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
- Henson, K. (2004). Writing for publication: Road to academic advancement. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
- Herrick, J. A. (2007). Argumentation: Understanding and shaping arguments (3d ed.). State College, PA: Strata.
- Hillocks, G., Jr. (2011). Teaching argument: Critical thinking for reading and writing. Portsmouth, UK: Heinemann.
- Hirschheim, R. (2008). Some guidelines for the critical reviewing of conceptual papers. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 9(8), 432–441. doi:10.17705/1jais
- Hoogenboom, B. J., & Manske, R. C. (2012). How to write a scientific article. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 7(5), 512–517.
- Horrobin, D. F. (1990). The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation. Journal of American Medical Association, 263(10), 1438–1441. doi:10.1001/jama.1990.03440100162024
- Ivanič, R. (2004). Discourses of writing and learning to write. Language and Education, 18(3), 220–245. doi:10.1080/09500780408666877
- Jefferson, T., Alderson, P., Wager, E., & Davidoff, F. (2002). Effects of editorial peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(21), 2784–2786. doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2784
- Jefferson, T., Wager, E., & Davidoff, F. (2002). Measuring the quality of editorial peer review. Journal of American Medical Association, 287(21), 2786–2790. doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2786
- Joiner, R., & Jones, S. (2003). The effects of communication medium on argumentation and the development of critical thinking. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(8), 861–871. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2004.11.008
- Kaplan, D. J. (2005). How to fix peer review: Separating its two functions - improving manuscripts and judging their scientific merit - would help. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 14(3), 321–323. doi:10.1007/s10826-005-6845-3
- Kneupper, C. W. (1978). Teaching argument: An introduction to the toulmin model. College Composition and Communication, 29(3), 237–241. doi:10.2307/356935
- Lamont, M., & Huutoninemi, K. (2011). Comparing customary rules of fairness: Evaluative practices in various types of peer review panels. In C. Camic, N. Gross, & M. Lamont (Eds.), Social knowledge in the making. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- Lawley, J., & Tompkins, P. (2000). Metaphors in mind: Transformation through symbolic modelling. Camarthen, UK: The Developing Company Press.
- Lea, M., & Street, B. (1999). Writing as academic literacies: Understanding textual practices in higher education. In C. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds.), Writing: Texts, processes and practices (pp. 62–81). London, UK: Longman.
- Lee, A. (1995). Reviewing a Manuscript for Publication. Journal of Operations Management, 13(1), 87–92. doi:10.1016/0272-6963(95)94762-W
- Lee, A. (2000). Submitting a manuscript for publication: Some advice and an insider’s view. MIS Quarterly, 24(2), iii–vii.
- Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merril Prentice Hall.
- Liesegang, T. J., Albert, D. M., Schachat, A. P., & Minckler, D. S. (2003). The editorial process for medical journals: I. Introduction of a series and discussion of the responsibilities of editors, authors, and reviewers. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 136(1), 109–113.
- Lindsay, S. (2015). What works for doctoral students in completing their thesis? Teaching in Higher Education, 20(2), 183–196. doi:10.1080/13562517.2014.974025
- MacKenzie, S. B. (2003). The danger of poor construct conceptualisation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(3), 323–326. doi:10.1177/0092070303031003011
- Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse. London, UK: Continuum.
- McDonald, W. (2013). Writing the self and others: Reflection as a learning tool. Australian Journalism Review, 35(2), 133–145.
- McNamara, D. S., Crossley, S. A., & McCarthy, P. M. (2010). Linguistic features of writing quality. Written Communication, 57(1), 57–86. doi:10.1177/0741088309351547
- Murray, D. M. (2005). Write to learn (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Michael Rosenberg.
- Murray, R. (2009). Writing for academic journals (2nd ed.). Berkshire, UK: Open University Press (McGraw-Hill).
- Murray, R., & Moore, S. (2006). A handbook of academic writing: A fresh approach. New York, NY: Open University Press.
- Myhill, D., & Jones, S. (2007). More than just error correction: Students’ perspectives on their revision processes during writing. Written Communication, 24(4), 323–343. doi:10.1177/0741088307305976
- Newell, R. (2001). Writing academic papers: A guide for prospective authors. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, 17(2), 110–116. doi:10.1054/iccn.2000.1538
- Ohwovoriole, A. E. (2011). Writing biomedical manuscripts part I: Standard elements and common errors. West African Journal of Medicine, 30(3), 151–157.
- Olson, C., Rennie, D., Cook, D., Dickersin, K., Flanagin, A., Hogan, J. W., … Pace, B. (2002). Publication bias in editorial decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(21), 2825–2828. doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2825
- Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006a). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
- Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006b). The thinker’s guide to the art of asking essential questions (4th ed.). Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.
- Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2013). 30 days to better thinking and better living through critical thinking. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
- Perry, C., Carson, D., & Gilmore, A. (2003). Joining a conversation: Writing for EJM’s editors, reviewers and readers requires planning, care and persistence. European Journal of Marketing, 37(5/6), 652–667. doi:10.1108/03090560310465071
- Picardi, N. (2016). Rules to be adopted for publishing a scientific paper. Annali italiani di chirurgia, 87(1), 1–3.
- Pidd, M. (2009). Tools for thinking. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
- Plaisance, L. (2003). The “write” way to get published in a professional journal. Pain Management Nursing, 4(4), 165–170.
- Pondy, L. (1995). The reviewer as defense attorney. In L. Cummings & P. Frost (Eds.), Publishing in the organizational sciences (2nd ed., pp. 183–194). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- Schiappa, E., & Nordin, J. P. (2014). Argumentation: Keeping faith with reason. Boston, MA: Pearson.
- Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling, goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 159–172. doi:10.1080/10573560308219
- Shulman, M. (2005). In focus: Strategies for academic writers. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
- Solagberu, B. A. (2002). Literature search in medical publications. West African Journal of Medicine, 21(4), 329–331.
- Stebbing, S. (1952). Thinking to Some Purpose. London, UK: Penguin Books Ltd.
- Stevenson, M., & Kokkinn, B. (2007). Pinned to the margins? The contextual shaping of academic language and learning practice. Journal of Academic Language and Learning, 1(1), A-44–A-54.
- Summers, J. O. (2001). Guidelines for conducting research and publishing in Marketing: From conceptualization through the review process. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(4), 405–415. doi:10.1177/03079450094243
- Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor, MI: Univ. Michigan Press.
- Sylvan, B., & Bedau, H. (1999). Critical thinking, reading, and writing: A brief guide to argument (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Bedford St. Martins.
- Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning. New York, NY: Macmillan.
- Tynjälä, P., Mason, L., & Lonka, K. (Eds.). (2001). Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice. Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- Van Waes, L., & Schellens, P. J. (2003). Writing profiles: The effect of the writing mode on pausing and revision patterns of experienced writers. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(6), 829–853. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00121-2
- Varadarajan, P. R. (1996). From the editor: Reflections on research and publishing. Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 3–6.
- Voss, G. B. (2003). Formulating interesting research questions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(3), 356–359. doi:10.1177/0092070303031003020
- Wardale, D., Hendrickson, T., Jefferson, T., Klass, D., Lord, L., & Marinelli, M. (2015). Creating an oasis: Some insights into the practice and theory of a successful academic writing group. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(6), 1297–1310. doi:10.1080/07294360.2015.1024621
- Ware, M. (2008). Peer review in scholarly journals: Perspective of the scholarly community – Results from an international study. Information Services & Use, 28(2), 109–112. doi:10.3233/ISU-2008-0568
- Weber, E. J., Katz, P. P., Waeckerle, J. F., et al. (2002). Author perception of peer review, impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction. Journal of American Medical Association, 287(21), 2790–2793. doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2790
- Wessely, S. (1996). What do we know about peer review? Psychological Medicine, 26(5), 883–886. doi:10.1017/S0033291700035224
- Weston, A. (2009). A rulebook for arguments (4th ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
- Williams, J. M., & Colomb, G. G. (2007). The craft of argument. New York, NY: Pearson.
- Yagelski, R. P., Miller, R. K., & Crouse-Powers, A. J. (2004). The informed argument (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
- Zikmund, W. G. (2003). Business research methods (7th ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson/South-Western.
- Zmud, R. (1998). A personal perspective on the state of journal refereeing. MIS Quarterly, 22(3), xlv–xlviii.