Peer review for journals as it stands today - Part 2

被引:85
作者
Campanario, JM [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Alcala de Henares, Dept Fis, Alcala De Henares 28871, Madrid, Spain
关键词
D O I
10.1177/1075547098019004002
中图分类号
G2 [信息与知识传播];
学科分类号
05 ; 0503 ;
摘要
This two-part article reviews the current literature on journal peer review. Research on this subject has grown during the 1980s and 1990s and has increased our awareness of both the myths and facts about peer review. Part 1 summarizes research findings on the participants in the system (the appointment mechanisms of editors and referees, and reviewer tasks and qualifications) and systemic problems of reliability, accuracy, and bias. Part 2 describes current research on how fraud, favoritism, and self-interest may affect the review system and on such policy issues as interference of particularistic criteria; connections among editors, authors, and referees; and double-blind review. Although the literature indicates that peer review has many problems, the author concludes that it is difficult to imagine how science could advance without such a key quality control mechanism.
引用
收藏
页码:277 / 306
页数:30
相关论文
共 150 条
[1]   PUBLISH OR POLITIC - REFEREE BIAS IN MANUSCRIPT REVIEW [J].
ABRAMOWITZ, SI ;
GOMES, B ;
ABRAMOWITZ, CV .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1975, 5 (03) :187-200
[2]   ARE PAPERS BY WELL-KNOWN ASTRONOMERS ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION MORE READILY THAN OTHER PAPERS [J].
ABT, HA .
PUBLICATIONS OF THE ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY OF THE PACIFIC, 1987, 99 (615) :439-441
[3]  
American Psychological Association, 2016, ETH PRINC PSYCH COD, DOI DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.57.12.1060
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1989, J ACAD MARKET SCI, DOI DOI 10.1007/BF02726642
[5]   The Ombudsman: Management folklore and management science - On portfolio planning, escalation bias, and such [J].
Armstrong, JS ;
Arkes, HR ;
Franke, RH ;
Peterson, RA ;
Armstrong, JS .
INTERFACES, 1996, 26 (04) :25-55
[6]   BARRIERS TO SCIENTIFIC CONTRIBUTIONS - THE AUTHORS FORMULA [J].
ARMSTRONG, JS .
BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, 1982, 5 (02) :197-199
[7]   THE MANUSCRIPT REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING PROCESS [J].
BAKANIC, V ;
MCPHAIL, C ;
SIMON, RJ .
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1987, 52 (05) :631-642
[8]   MIXED MESSAGES - REFEREES COMMENTS ON THE MANUSCRIPTS THEY REVIEW [J].
BAKANIC, V ;
MCPHAIL, C ;
SIMON, RJ .
SOCIOLOGICAL QUARTERLY, 1989, 30 (04) :639-654
[9]   THE MISSING CRYSTALLOGRAPHY DATA [J].
BARINAGA, M .
SCIENCE, 1989, 245 (4923) :1179-1181
[10]   CONFUSION ON THE CUTTING EDGE [J].
BARINAGA, M .
SCIENCE, 1992, 257 (5070) :616-619