Academic Journals through the Lens of Socialism: A Narrative from the Disciplines of Education and Technology

Lily, Abdulrahman Essa Al

doi:10.1007/s12109-016-9451-x

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Deliberate and avoidable delay in manuscript review is self-explanatory but difficult to pinpoint (Baylis et al, 2017), especially when paired with instances where editorial policies are not provided or spelled out. To clarify, while a journal may have editorial policies posted on a publishing house's page, if there is not a direct link to these policies on the journal's page, then it becomes all too easy for an editor to ignore or misapply these policies, and extremely difficult for authors to push back, advocating for themselves and their work (Al Lily, 2016;Wager, 2012).…”

Section: Categories Of Editorial Misconductmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A contextualization of editorial misconduct in the library and information science academic information ecosystem

Green

Johnston

2021

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last decade, one of the most effective tools applied in combating the erosion of public trust in academic research has been an increased level of transparency in the peer review and editorial process. Publicly available publication ethics guidelines and policies are vital in creating a transparent process that prevents unethical research, publication misconduct, manipulation of the communication of research to practitioners, and the erosion of public trust. This study investigated how these unethical practices, specifically those coded as editorial misconduct, bring the authenticity and integrity of the library and information science academic research digital record into question. Employing a multi‐layered approach, including key informant interviews, researchers determined the frequency and the content of ethical publishing policies and procedures in library and information science journals; exploring the ways the lack of, or nonadherence to these policies and procedures impacted library and information science researchers in instances of editorial misconduct.

show abstract

Section: Categories Of Editorial Misconductmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rejection without reason given refers to editorial desk rejections versus peer review rejections (Al Lily, 2016; Teixeira da Silva et al, 2019). Lastly, rewriting of articles presented as copyediting differs from encroachment on authorial integrity (a situation where the editor manipulates the text).…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%