| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
121634
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Many scholars discount the value of edited volumes and book chapters to the social science enterprise. Nevertheless, these unique formats advance scholarship, help faculty and graduate students achieve their goals, and enhance teaching and learning. This article therefore assesses the criticisms of volumes and chapters, reconsiders the contributions of these publications, and makes recommendations for improving their accessibility and status.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
155737
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
How does the structure of the peer review process, which can vary among journals, influence the quality of papers published in a journal? This article studies multiple systems of peer review using computational simulation. I find that, under any of the systems I study, a majority of accepted papers are evaluated by an average reader as not meeting the standards of the journal. Moreover, all systems allow random chance to play a strong role in the acceptance decision. Heterogeneous reviewer and reader standards for scientific quality drive both results. A peer review system with an active editor—that is, one who uses desk rejection before review and does not rely strictly on reviewer votes to make decisions—can mitigate some of these effects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
116473
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Within the medical and physical sciences journals evidence suggests that problems of authorship ethics and journal management bedevil the editors of these journals. Although anecdotal evidence suggests that similar problems persist in political science, the extent of these problems within political science is not well established. Here we report the results of a survey of political science journal editors' perceptions of ethical and managerial issues associated with their journals. We find that unlike ethical publication concerns in the clinical and natural sciences fields, these issues are not of significant concern among our sample. Ethical problems are of low concern and editors report high levels of confidence to address these problems. Managerial problems, such as the adequacy of reviewer pools, are of higher concern to our sample.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|