Reviewer :

Detailed Response to Reviewer Comments Reviewer :

Is This Opinion Leader’s Review Useful? Peripheral Cues for Online Review Helpfulness

With the growing popularity of online user-generated reviews, research has emerged to understand the mechanism of how a review is voted helpful, focusing on the central-route influences of review content and quality, yet little research has studied the roles of peripheral cues such as reviewer credibility and contextual factors. Drawing on the theories of elaboration likelihood model and source...

Frequency of data extraction errors and methods to increase data extraction quality: a methodological review

BACKGROUND Our objective was to assess the frequency of data extraction errors and its potential impact on results in systematic reviews. Furthermore, we evaluated the effect of different extraction methods, reviewer characteristics and reviewer training on error rates and results. METHODS We performed a systematic review of methodological literature in PubMed, Cochrane methodological registr...

Integrating the Trend of Research Interest for Reviewer Assignment

Reviewer assignment problem in the research field usually refers to invite experts for comments on the quality of papers, projects, etc. Different factors in conventional approaches are reckoned to choose appropriate reviewers, such as the relevance between reviewer candidates and submissions, the diversity of candidates. However, many studies ignore the temporal changes of reviewer interest an...

Response to Reviewer : Reviewer :

Review History of 2009ja015069

Below and/or attached are two reviews of the above manuscript. I am pleased to report that Reviewer #1 finds the manuscript acceptable for publication but Reviewer #2 still has some strong concerns. I have some sympathy with the view expressed in your covering letter, that Reviewer #2 may have a biased attitude. However, it would be inappropriate for me to entirely ignore their comments, so I p...