The gift of a hoax

Bergstrom CT (2018) A hollow exercise in mean-spirited mockery. The Chronical of Higher Education. Available at: www.chronicle.com/article/What-the-Grievance/244753 (accessed 22 February 2019).

Berkenkotter C (1995) The power and the perils of peer review. Rhetoric Review 13(2): 245–248.

Drisko C (1999) Reviewing a manuscript: The reviewer’s experience and standards. Families in Society—The Journal of Contemporary Human Services 80(4): 417–419.

Faggen R (2006) Czesław Miłosz: The art of poetry LXX. In: Haven CL (ed.) Czesław Miłosz: Conversations. 1st ed. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, pp.149–170.

Godlee F (2002) Making reviewers visible: Openness, accountability, and credit. JAMA 287(21): 2762–2765.

Haidt J (2012) The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York, NY: Vintage.

Kahneman D (2003) A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist 58(9): 697–720.

Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Lindsay JA Boghossian P Pluckrose H (2018) Academic grievance studies and the corruption of scholarship. Areomagazine. Available at: https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/

Lukianoff G Haidt J (2015) The coddling of the American mind. The Atlantic Monthly. Available at: www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

Lukianoff G Haidt J (2018) The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas are Setting up a Generation for Failure. New York, NY: Penguin Press.

Mounk Y (2018) What an audacious hoax reveals about academia. The Atlantic Monthly. Available at: www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/new-sokal-hoax/572212/

National Association of Social Workers (2017) NASW Code of Ethics: Approved by the 1996 NASW Delegate Assembly and revised by the 2017 NASW Delegate Assembly. Available at: www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English

Park Y Bhuyan R Wahab S (2019) Reclaiming the space of contestation. Affilia: Journal of Women & Social Work 34(1): 5–7.

Piedra LM (2018) A case for olive branches. Qualitative Social Work 17(4): 485–486.

Pontille D Torny D (2015) From manuscript evaluation to article valuation: The changing technologies of journal peer review. Human Studies 38(1): 57–79.

Pöschl U (2012) Multi-stage open peer review: Scientific evaluation integrating the strengths of traditional peer review with the virtues of transparency and self-regulation. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience 6(33): 1–16.

Sancier B (1986a) Editorial. Affilia: Journal of Women & Social Work 1(2): 3–5.

Sancier B (1986b) Editorial. Affilia: Journal of Women & Social Work 1(3): 3–5.

Schuessler J (2018) Hoaxers slip breastaurants and dog-park sex into journals. New York Times. Available at: www.nytimes.com/2018/10/04/arts/academic-journals-hoax.html

Shanahan DR Olsen BR (2014) Opening peer-review: The democracy of science. Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine 13(1): 2.

Shaw IF (2019) The craft of journal practice. Qualitative Social Work 18(2): 194–211.

Staller K (2007) Metalogue as methodology: Inquiries into conversations among authors, editors and referees. Qualitative Social Work 6(2): 137–157.

Straumsheim C (2015) ‘Predatory’ publishing up. Inside Higher Ed. Available at: www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/10/01/study-finds-huge-increase-articles-published-predatory-journals

Wicherts JM (2016) Peer review quality and transparency of the peer-review process in open access and subscription journals. PLoS One 11(1): e0147913.