scholarly journals “The Grievance Studies Affair” Project: Reconstructing and Assessing the Experimental Design

2020 ◽  
pp. 016224392092308
Author(s):  
Mikko Lagerspetz
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Experimental Design ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Quality Standards ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Academic Education ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Peer Reviewing

Recently, high media visibility was reached by an experiment that involved “hoaxlike deception” of journals within humanities and social sciences. Its aim was to provide evidence of “inadequate” quality standards especially within gender studies. The article discusses the project in the context of both previous systematic studies of peer reviewing and scientific hoaxes and analyzes its possible empirical outcomes. Despite claims to the contrary, the highly political, both ethically and methodologically flawed “experiment” failed to provide the evidence it sought. The experiences can be summed up as follows: (1) journals with higher impact factors were more likely to reject papers submitted as part of the project; (2) the chances were better, if the manuscript was allegedly based on empirical data; (3) peer reviews can be an important asset in the process of revising a manuscript; and (4) when the project authors, with academic education from neighboring disciplines, closely followed the reviewers’ advice, they were able to learn relatively quickly what is needed for writing an acceptable article. The boundary between a seriously written paper and a “hoax” gradually became blurred. Finally (5), the way the project ended showed that in the long run, the scientific community will uncover fraudulent practices.

Peer reviewing made easier: your questions answered

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neel Halder ◽  
Peter Tyrer ◽  
Patricia Casey
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Community Building ◽  
Previous Article ◽  
Scientific Process ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Entire Process ◽  
Peer Reviewing ◽  
Peer Reviewers

SUMMARY Peer reviewing is a hugely important part of the scientific process that ensures published articles are of sufficient quality to deserve dissemination to the wider scientific community. Building on a previous article published in this journal, this article addresses topics that potential or practising peer reviewers may find useful. These include what peer reviewing is, why do peer reviews, how to become a reviewer, what to write in a review and where to find more information. It includes a template for writing a review, and lists various websites and guidelines that can help ease the entire process depending on what type of article is being reviewed. Peer reviewing can be enormously rewarding and help clinicians diversify their scope of work while also benefiting the scientific community by contributing to the quality control of published work.

scholarly journals MANUSCRIPT PEER REVIEWS: DO THEY ENHANCE HORTICULTURE OR CONCEAL FRAUD?

HortScience ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 25 (9) ◽  
pp. 1116b-1116
Author(s):  
Bruce M. Pollock
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Community ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Public Agencies ◽  
Congressional Committee ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
The Public ◽  
Peer Reviewing ◽  
Almost All

The process of peer reviewing manuscripts is frequently considered to be a time-consuming chore. It is, however, critical in maintaining the quality of the society's journals and the respect of the scientific community for the members of the society. The purpose of peer reviews is to insure that the research and resultant paper represent sound and state-of-the-art science. Failure of a paper to achieve this level of excellence, and its subsequent inclusion in the scientist's publication list, essentially falsifies the scientist's credentials and makes each subsequent “promotion based on `those credentials an act of fraud. Since almost all horticultural scientists engaged in research are employees of state or federal agencies, these acts of fraud are against the public agencies and the taxpayers. The editor of the society's journals has recently spoken out against below-standard peer reviews. Unfortunately, the type of peer reviews to which he refers are typical of those I have encountered throughout my 30 years experience with horticulture. I suggest it is time that the members of the ASHS look carefully at the situation before a congressional committee does.

Pains and Gains of Peer-Reviewing in Software Engineering (5)

2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 14-14
Author(s):  
Jacopo Soldani
Keyword(s):  
Software Engineering ◽  
Lively Discussion ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Peer Reviewing

ACM SIGSOFT SEN's column on "Pains and Gains of Peer-Reviewing in Software Engineering" aims at fostering an open, constructive, and lively discussion on the peer-reviewing currently adopted by SE venues, e.g., how to further enhance them and make them sustainable on the long run. This fifth editorial introduces a new contribution to the column, which provides a journal-centric perspective on the topic.

Journal influence in corporate research

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 376-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Borokhovich ◽  
Allissa Lee ◽  
Betty Simkins
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Corporate Finance ◽  
Relative Influence ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
The Social ◽  
Total Influence ◽  
The Impact

Purpose – Studies of research influence commonly look at the overall field of finance. The purpose of this paper is to examine the sub-field of corporate finance at four different points in time to determine its evolution and range of influence, specifically focussing on the relative influence of seven leading journals. Design/methodology/approach – Not all articles appearing in the set of journals are in corporate finance. The authors examine each article published in the journals for four key periods and identify those that are corporate. The impact factors (IFs) published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) are for all articles appearing in a journal. The authors are interested only in the corporate articles, so the authors calculate separate corporate IFs based on the citations to the corporate articles using the JCR technique. Findings – The authors find a broad corporate research environment with influence that extends well beyond finance. The authors also find differences in the relative influence of the journals not only in their total influence, but in where the influence occurs outside finance and other business journals and even more broadly in the social sciences. Research limitations/implications – The exclusion of journals outside the seven selected may not uncover other areas where corporate finance articles impact research more broadly. Also, classification of articles is inherently subjective. Practical implications – The authors draw comparisons between journals and corporate finance topic areas; indicating the breadth and depth research in these areas attain. These results should prove beneficial to researchers in determining areas of influence for their work, consequently providing opportunities for additional exchanges of ideas resulting in better and more informed research in the overall social sciences. Further, our approach to analyzing journal influence could prove fruitful for additional research. Originality/value – The findings allow for a greater understanding of the influence of individual journals and their subsequent rankings by a number of different means. The authors propose that the means and measures employed here can lead to a greater understanding of how influential a journal really is. Further, the authors contend that the study provides comparisons of the scope and depth of influence for each journal in a way that could lead to new avenues of research.

MENINGKATKAN HASIL BELAJAR IPS TENTANG KEDUDUKAN DALAM KELUARGA DENGAN PENDEKATAN PAKEM

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (XIV) ◽  
pp. 58-65
Author(s):  
Windhiyanti Windhiyanti
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Primary School ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Learning Achievement ◽  
School Year ◽  
The Family ◽  
Spiral Model

The purpose of this study was to obtain empirical data on learning achievement in Social Sciences on the position in the family. The study was conducted in Grade 2 of State Primary School 01, Morning School, in Cilandak Timur. The study applied active, creative, effective, and joyfull learning (PAKEM) approach. The subjects were Grade 2 students in the second semesterof 2008/2009 school year. As an action research, the spiral model or S cycle introduced by Kemmis and Mc Taggard was used. The steps included planning, acting, observing, reflecting, and evaluating, as the bases for the following cycle. The result of the study showed there is a significant learning achievement improvement of the students at the end of the second cycle. The study indicates PAKEM approach can be applied as one of the solution of improving the students’ learning achievement in Social Sciences particularly in Grade 2 of Primary School.

Building a global scientific community

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-122
Author(s):  
Stefan Bargheer
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
North Africa ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
European Research ◽  
Research Perspective ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Social

The three volumes reviewed in this essay assemble over 40 case studies written by more than 50 contributors that trace the development of the social sciences and humanities in Europe (East and West) and a number of countries in Latin America, North Africa, and East Asia. Two of these volumes grew out of the European research project ‘International Cooperation in the Social Sciences and Humanities’ (INTERCO-SSH); the third volume extends the focus of this project to Eastern Europe. A particularly innovative aspect shared by all contributions is the application of a transnational research perspective.

Qualitative Inquiry in the Neoliberal Public Sphere: Contesting Accountability Metrics

2020 ◽  
pp. 107780042097015
Author(s):  
Pamela Zapata-Sepúlveda
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Public Sphere ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Academic Career ◽  
Quality Standards ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
Constructive Dialogue ◽  
Local Quality ◽  
Academic Publications

Based on a critical and constructive dialogue that I articulate drawing from different authors concerned about the differentiated value that is given to academic publications at present, I reflect from the standpoint of a particular Latin American context on how we can meet the demands of governments regarding education and science, contributing to the development of our universities while complying with international and local quality standards, but without losing the sense of an academic career project aimed at generating knowledge in social sciences that can be put at the service of communities that are researched and contribute to the improvement of people’s lives.

Group Peer Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 452-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gail Teachman ◽  
Martine C. Lévesque ◽  
Mark Tambe Keboa ◽  
Basem Adel Danish ◽  
Konstantinos Mastorakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Research Training ◽  
Writing Strategies ◽  
Ongoing Debate ◽  
Postgraduate Students ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Constructive Feedback ◽  
Peer Reviewing ◽  
First Time

Invitation to review a manuscript for publication marks an exciting milestone in graduate and postgraduate students’ training. Yet, peer reviewing is seldom explicitly taught. First-time reviewers approaching this task often lack mentorship, guidelines, and confidence. The ongoing debate about how to judge the quality of qualitative research can further complicate the task. In this article, we introduce an innovative model for conducting group peer reviews in the context of qualitative research training. After setting out the model's principles and process, we discuss its merits and reflect on our experiences as trainees and supervisor using the approach. In addition to providing opportunities for mentorship in appraisal methods, writing strategies, and approaches for framing constructive feedback, we suggest the model has the potential to advance trainees’ development as collegial peers and their overall learning as qualitative researchers. Finally, we discuss potential ways forward to extend the model in other contexts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document