Research Note-Making Peer Review Evidence-Based: It's Time to Open the "Black Box"

被引:0
作者
Dunleavy, Daniel J.
机构
关键词
SOCIAL-WORK JOURNALS; EMPIRICAL-EVALUATION; PUBLICATION; QUALITY; EDITORS; MANUSCRIPT; ANONYMITY; SCIENCE; AUTHORS; SUBMISSIONS;
D O I
10.1080/10437797.2024.2378685
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Peer review serves an essential role in the cultivation, validation, and dissemination of social work scholarship. Nevertheless, the current peer review system has been described as unreliable, biased, ineffective, and unaccountable, among numerous other issues. That said, peer review is still commonly viewed as the best possible system of knowledge governance, given the relevant alternatives. In this research note, I scrutinize this assumption. Although peer review can sometimes be effective, it is not therefore a rigorous or even dependable system. Indeed, the practice of peer review in social work is overwhelmingly closed and opaque, and assurances of its rigor are speculative at best. After highlighting common criticisms of traditional peer review, I articulate a research agenda on "open peer review".
引用
收藏
页码:160 / 170
页数:11
相关论文
共 117 条
  • [81] Freedom and responsibility in medical publication - Setting the balance right
    Rennie, D
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 280 (03): : 300 - 302
  • [82] ETHICS OF MEDICAL PUBLICATION
    RENNIE, D
    [J]. MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 1979, 2 (08) : 409 - 412
  • [83] Resnik D. B., 2020, Stress, P99, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-36822-7_9
  • [84] Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors
    Resnik, David B.
    Elmore, Susan A.
    [J]. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2016, 22 (01) : 169 - 188
  • [85] Resnik DB, 2011, AM SCI, V99, P24
  • [86] Social work research and the quest for effective practice
    Rosen, A
    Proctor, EK
    Staudt, MM
    [J]. SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH, 1999, 23 (01) : 4 - 14
  • [87] Rosenblatt A., 1980, J SOCIAL SERVICE RES, V3, P383, DOI https://doi.org/10.1300/J079v03n0404
  • [88] Ross-Hellauer T., 2017, LSE IMPACT BLOG
  • [89] Guidelines for open peer review implementation
    Ross-Hellauer, Tony
    Goeroegh, Edit
    [J]. RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND PEER REVIEW, 2019, 4 (01)
  • [90] Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers
    Ross-Hellauer, Tony
    Deppe, Arvid
    Schmidt, Birgit
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (12):