Ethics in Peer Review of Academic Journal Articles as Perceived by Authors in the Educational Sciences

Atjonen, Päivi

doi:10.1007/s10805-018-9308-3

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are many reasons why peer review may be slow [ 3 ]. Independent of the reason, these long periods can negatively impact an academic’s career and demotivate them, especially if the experience is repetitive across different journals or publishers [ 4 ]. Journal editors thus need to handle submitted papers and screen them quickly and diligently.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accelerated Peer Review and Paper Processing Models in Academic Publishing

Silva

Yamada

2022

Pub Res Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some journals and publishers offer a free or paid rapid peer review service. In the latter case, such a service is offered at a premium, i.e., for an additional fee, and authors receive, in return, a privileged service, namely faster peer review. In the cut-throat world of survival in academia, the difference of a few weeks or months in terms of speed of peer review and publication may bring untold benefits to authors that manage to benefit from accelerated peer review. We examine the deontological aspects behind this two-tier peer review system, including some positive, but mainly negative, aspects. Some paid accelerated peer review services thrive. We examine the paid accelerated peer review services by Taylor & Francis, Future Medicine Ltd., Elsevier, and two stand-alone journals that are OASPA members. This suggests that there is a demand, and thus market, for faster peer review. However, this privilege risks creating a two-tiered system that may divide academics between those who can pay versus those who cannot. We recommend that those papers that have benefited from accelerated peer review clearly indicate this in the published papers, as either a disclaimer or within the acknowledgements, for maximum transparency of the peer review and publication process.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accelerated Peer Review and Paper Processing Models in Academic Publishing

Silva

Yamada

2022

Pub Res Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The contribution of both editors and research units is crucial to improve the skills and sensitivity of reviewers. For example, ethical guidelines and principles of constructive feedback must be written, and reviewers and editors must be expected to follow them (Atjonen, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer review in the development of academic articles: Experiences of Finnish authors in the educational sciences

Atjonen

2018

Learned Publishing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examined author experiences of the developmental feedback regarding peer review of journal articles. It focused on quite experienced authors in the educational sector of all eight universities in Finland. Data were gathered using an electronic questionnaire, which was completed by 121 respondents. The majority of authors perceived reviewer feedback as developmental and appreciated critical but constructive review. Over 60% of respondents found reviewers usually keen to improve the article and to provide pertinent critique. Less than 8% reported frequent experience of reviewers who were not experts or provided unjustified accusations. A third reported reviewer feedback that was frequently biased or based on different paradigms. The most published authors were the most satisfied with the developmental feedback, but postdoctoral researchers had received more developmental complementary feedback than any other groups. The results indicate that the peer review system remains useful for ensuring article quality, but some attention is still required to ensure developmental feedback that will help the authors enhance their manuscripts.

show abstract

“…Thus, Hewings (2004) analysed 228 reviews submitted to the journal English for Specific Purposes, finding that 'reviewers take on multiple roles, at the same time discouraging the publication of work that fails to meet the required standards and offering encouragement to authors and guiding them towards publication' (p. 247). Atjonen (2018) surveyed the opinions of 121 Finnish researchers on the ethics of peer review, concluding that:…”

Section: Refereed Journal Articlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Peer Review Fit for Purpose?

Tight

2022

Peer Review in an Era of Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peer review is endemic to judgement in higher education. It is assumed that when we need to make a judgement on the quality of something—student performance, academic employment, teaching, research and publication—then we may rely on the assessment of peers, whether they be fellow students, lecturers or more senior academics. This chapter will illustrate and challenge this assumption, and assess how ‘fit for purpose’ peer review is in twenty-first century academe. It will focus on different practices of peer review in the contemporary higher education system, it will also question how well they work, how they might be improved and what the alternatives are. The examples to be discussed include refereed journal articles, the assessment of doctoral degrees and the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF).

show abstract

Ethics in Peer Review of Academic Journal Articles as Perceived by Authors in the Educational Sciences

Cited by 12 publications

References 34 publications

Accelerated Peer Review and Paper Processing Models in Academic Publishing

Accelerated Peer Review and Paper Processing Models in Academic Publishing

Peer review in the development of academic articles: Experiences of Finnish authors in the educational sciences

Is Peer Review Fit for Purpose?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About