Perceptions of Professional Social Work Journals: Findings From a National Survey

Abstract

A national survey of 556 faculty at accredited schools of social work examined 4 dimensions of the publishing process: publishing productivity, perceptions of overall quality of social work journals, satisfaction with social work journals, and perspectives on the manuscript review process. Findings indicate the publishing process in social work is perceived as a system of complex relationships between individual and institutional arrangements. Qualitative analysis provided the basis for a discussion of strategies for improving the relevance, methodological rigor, and overall quality of professional social work journals.

Evaluation of Social Work Journal Quality: Citation versus Reputation Approaches

“…Gender, academic rank, publication history, and departmental culture may all affect these evaluations. Further research into such factors is necessary (Green, 1998;Sellers et al, 2003).…”

Measuring the Quality of Peer-Reviewed Publications in Social Work: Impact Factors—Liberation or Liability?

“…Sellers et al (2006) speculate that these findings may reflect either the multi-disciplinary nature of social work and social work research, and/or authors' dissatisfaction with social work journals. However, none of these studies-including that of Sellers et al (2006)-has explored the reasons for this particular phenomenon. Clearly, however, it has potentially significant implications for achieving a meaningful assessment of social work research.…”

“…Sellers et al (2006) also cite three other US studies that highlight the percentage of social work academics who publish their research in what are perceived to be non-social work journals-ranging from nearly 30% (Meinert, 1993) through 40% (Green and Secret, 1996), to 50% or more (Schiele, 1991;Green et al, 2002). Sellers et al (2006) speculate that these findings may reflect either the multi-disciplinary nature of social work and social work research, and/or authors' dissatisfaction with social work journals. However, none of these studies-including that of Sellers et al (2006)-has explored the reasons for this particular phenomenon.…”

“…According to Sellers et al (2006), 35% of respondents cited at least one additional journal, although these varied considerably and none received many mentions. The two most frequently mentioned were: (1) American Journal of Orthopsychiatry (n ¼ 14; 2.5%) and (2) Reflections (n ¼ 8; 1.4%).…”

“…Given the nature of social work and social work research, this is not only a partial measure of research impact but fails to capture more Sellers et al (2006).…”