Peer Review for Journals as it Stands Today—Part 2

Campanario, Juan Miguel

doi:10.1177/1075547098019004002

Cited by 131 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 106 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…So, although self-citations may not increase the likelihood that a particular article is cited (Medoff, 2006), they do increase the chances that a particular author is cited. There is also some evidence that including self-citations in a submitted manuscript increases the chances of getting the manuscript accepted for publication by the reviewers and the editor (Campanario, 1998). Based on these findings, researchers do indeed seem to have an incentive to promote their own work.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Self-Enhancement in Scientific Research: The Self-citation Bias

Brysbaert

Smyth

2011

PSYCHOL BELG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A typical psychology article contains 3 to 9 self-citations, depending on the length of the reference list (10% of all citations). In contrast, cited colleagues rarely receive more than 3 citations. This is what we call the self-citation bias: the preference researchers have to refer to their own work when they guide readers to the relevant literature. We argue that this finding is difficult to understand within the traditional, science-based view, which says that reference lists are there to help the reader. It is more easily understood within a social view of reference lists which argues that scientists form groups and that reference lists partly reflect well-known phenomena in social psychology and group dynamics. Within this view, the self-citation bias is a self-serving bias motivated by self-enhancement and self-promotion. The self-citation bias in psychological scienceScientific publications are a never-ending source of inspiration, not only due to the information they contain but also because of the formal characteristics they adhere to. In particular the reference lists have been scrutinised recently with some quite remarkable findings. Below we summarise first the available evidence and we look then more specifically at the number of self-citations in journal articles and the reasons why authors cite themselves. The traditional, science-based view of reference listsReaders of scientific articles expect an article's reference list to comprise information about the publications they need for a good understanding of the article's contribution to the field (i.e., the cumulative nature of science) and for a replication of the reported studies if they wish to do so (i.e., the replicability of the findings). From this perspective, reference lists are at the readers' service, to help them find critical information. We will call this the traditional, science-based view of reference lists.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Self-Enhancement in Scientific Research: The Self-citation Bias

Brysbaert

Smyth

2011

PSYCHOL BELG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Peer review elicits strong feelings and diverse attitudes (Baumeister 1990;Bedeian 1996a, b;Holbrook 1986). Gossip about inconsistent reviews and biased reviewers pervades academe, and studies have documented various biases of reviewers (Armstrong 1997;Bedeian 2003;Campanario 1996Campanario , 1998bEllison 2002;Hargens 1990;Horrobin 1990;Mahoney et al 1978;Nylenna et al 1994). One interesting finding is that reviewers criticize the methodology of studies that cast doubt on theories that the reviewers like and they applaud the methodology of studies that support theories that they like (Mahoney 1977(Mahoney , 1979.…”

Section: What Is the Value Of A Manuscript?mentioning

confidence: 95%

How Much Better Are the Most-Prestigious Journals? The Statistics of Academic Publication

Starbuck

2005

Organization Science

384

256

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Articles in high-prestige journals receive more citations and more applause than articles in less-prestigious journals, but how much more do these articles contribute to knowledge? This article uses a statistical theory of review processes to draw inferences about differences value between articles in more-prestigious versus less-prestigious journals. This analysis indicates that there is much overlap in articles in different prestige strata. Indeed, theory implies that about half of the articles published are not among the best ones submitted to those journals, and some of the manuscripts that belong in the highest-value 20% have the misfortune to elicit rejections from as many as five journals. Some social science departments and business schools strongly emphasize publication in prestigious journals. Although one can draw inferences about an author’s average manuscript from the percentage in top-tier journals, the confidence limits for such inferences are wide. A focus on prestigious journals may benefit the most prestigious departments or schools but add randomness to the decisions of departments or schools that are not at the very top. Such a focus may also impede the development of knowledge when mediocre research receives the endorsement of high visibility.

show abstract

“…Signo de este abundante aluvión de publicaciones fue la aparición de una bibliografía (Specks, 1993), y de varios estados de la cuestión (Armstrong, 1997;Campanario, 1998Campanario, , 2002. Incluso, y especialmente en el ámbito biomédi-co, desde principios de 1990 se inició un verdadero proceso de investigación empírica sobre las fortalezas, debilidades y formas de mejorar el peer review, concretado en la celebración ya de hasta seis congresos 1 .…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

El <i>peer review</i> de las revistas científicas en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales: políticas y prácticas editoriales declaradas

Cardoso¹

2011

Rev. esp. doc. cient.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Peer Review for Journals as it Stands Today—Part 2

Cited by 131 publications

References 106 publications

Self-Enhancement in Scientific Research: The Self-citation Bias

Self-Enhancement in Scientific Research: The Self-citation Bias

How Much Better Are the Most-Prestigious Journals? The Statistics of Academic Publication

El <i>peer review</i> de las revistas científicas en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales: políticas y prácticas editoriales declaradas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About