scholarly journals Transparency of peer review: a semi-structured interview study with chief editors from social sciences and humanities

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Veli-Matti Karhulahti ◽  
Hans-Joachim Backe
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Institutional Policies ◽  
Manuscript Review ◽  
Publication Process ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities

Abstract Background Open peer review practices are increasing in medicine and life sciences, but in social sciences and humanities (SSH) they are still rare. We aimed to map out how editors of respected SSH journals perceive open peer review, how they balance policy, ethics, and pragmatism in the review processes they oversee, and how they view their own power in the process. Methods We conducted 12 pre-registered semi-structured interviews with editors of respected SSH journals. Interviews consisted of 21 questions and lasted an average of 67 min. Interviews were transcribed, descriptively coded, and organized into code families. Results SSH editors saw anonymized peer review benefits to outweigh those of open peer review. They considered anonymized peer review the “gold standard” that authors and editors are expected to follow to respect institutional policies; moreover, anonymized review was also perceived as ethically superior due to the protection it provides, and more pragmatic due to eased seeking of reviewers. Finally, editors acknowledged their power in the publication process and reported strategies for keeping their work as unbiased as possible. Conclusions Editors of SSH journals preferred the benefits of anonymized peer review over open peer and acknowledged the power they hold in the publication process during which authors are almost completely disclosed to editorial bodies. We recommend journals to communicate the transparency elements of their manuscript review processes by listing all bodies who contributed to the decision on every review stage.

scholarly journals Open Review and Open Science in the Social Sciences and Humanities: A "Double Blind" Gold Standard

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veli-Matti Karhulahti ◽  
Hans-Joachim Backe
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Multi Stage ◽  
The Social ◽  
Open Review

Openings of research results, datasets, and scientific practices in general are currently being implemented across fields. Especially strongly data-driven areas like medicine are discussing publishing transparency too – in a context where open review formats now dominate. Social sciences and humanities (SSH), in turn, still rely on closed systems. In this study, we draw on 12 semi-structured interviews with chief editors of leading journals in SSH fields to better understand the transparencies of such review processes. We find that, within SSH, ‘double blind’ peer review represents a gold standard that credible journals follow by default. However, the actual review processes of these journals are multi-stage and largely open with the authors’ names standardly visible to decision-making peers, with ‘double blind’ principles forming but part of it. We recommend journals to communicate the transparencies of their review in more detail, also and especially if they are ‘double blind’.

scholarly journals Open Review and Open Science in The Social Sciences and Humanities: A "Double Blind" Gold Standard

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veli-Matti Karhulahti ◽  
Hans-Joachim Backe
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Multi Stage ◽  
The Social ◽  
Open Review

Abstract Openings of research results, datasets, and scientific practices in general are currently being implemented across fields. Especially strongly data-driven areas like medicine are discussing publishing transparency too – in a context where open review formats now dominate. Social sciences and humanities (SSH), in turn, still rely on closed systems. In this study, we draw on 12 semi-structured interviews with chief editors of leading journals in SSH fields to better understand the transparencies of such review processes. We find that, within SSH, ‘double blind’ peer review represents a gold standard that credible journals follow by default. However, the actual review processes of these journals are multi-stage and largely open with the authors’ names standardly visible to decision-making peers, with ‘double blind’ principles forming but part of it. We recommend journals to communicate the transparencies of their review in more detail, also and especially if they are ‘double blind’.

scholarly journals Introduction 3-1

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. i-iii
Author(s):  
Syed Sami Raza
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Acceptance Rate ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Publication Process ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities

The Review of Human Rights has completed its third year of successful publication process. We received more than two-dozen research articles out of which only five could make it through the review process. The acceptance rate accordingly has reached to 18.5%, which means that its quality considerations are quite high. Our indexing and abstracting has expanded, so has our peer review board. Many renowned scholars in the fields of social sciences and humanities are now connected with us.

scholarly journals Editors’ perspectives on the peer-review process in biomedical journals: protocol for a qualitative study

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e020568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ketevan Glonti ◽  
Darko Hren
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Scientific Output ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Manuscript Review ◽  
Biomedical Journals ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Communication Practices

IntroductionDespite dealing with scientific output and potentially having an impact on the quality of research published, the manuscript peer-review process itself has at times been criticised for being ‘unscientific’. Research indicates that there are social and subjective dimensions of the peer-review process that contribute to this perception, including how key stakeholders—namely authors, editors and peer reviewers—communicate. In particular, it has been suggested that the expected roles and tasks of stakeholders need to be more clearly defined and communicated if the manuscript review process is to be improved. Disentangling current communication practices, and outlining the specific roles and tasks of the main actors, might be a first step towards establishing the design of interventions that counterbalance social influences on the peer-review process.The purpose of this article is to present a methodological design for a qualitative study exploring the communication practices within the manuscript review process of biomedical journals from the journal editors’ point of view.Methods and analysisSemi-structured interviews will be carried out with editors of biomedical journals between October 2017 and February 2018. A heterogeneous sample of participants representing a wide range of biomedical journals will be sought through purposive maximum variation sampling, drawing from a professional network of contacts, publishers, conference participants and snowballing.Interviews will be thematically analysed following the method outlined by Braun and Clarke. The qualitative data analysis software NVivo V.11 will be used to aid data management and analysis.Ethics and disseminationThis research project was evaluated and approved by the University of Split, Medical School Ethics Committee (2181-198-03-04-17-0029) in May 2017. Findings will be disseminated through a publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations during conferences.

scholarly journals The Uses and Disuses of Doctoral Degrees in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: The Case of Hungary

Triple Helix ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Annamária Inzelt ◽  
László Csonka
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Doctoral Degrees ◽  
Social Environments ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Academic Field ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Phd Education ◽  
Education Process

This study offers a contribution to our existing knowledge of the impacts of Hungarian social science and humanities PhDs on the graduates themselves and on their own personal and social environments. We employ new empirical findings—gained from an e-survey and from structured interviews—in an attempt to understand and explain impacts and lacks. Empirical analysis allowed us to identify certain differences in terms of usefulness in several respects, such as the specific sector of employment, mobility or the actual level of impact. The PhD education process and the degree itself have a more positive impact on personal satisfaction and on an individual’s career than on the employing organisation. A PhD degree in Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) fields seems to generate more in the way of benefit and impact in the academic field than in non-academic jobs—a difference which reflects on the academic orientation of Hungarian PhD education. All stakeholders need to devote further major efforts into developing the “dual” form of PhD education, so clearly benefitting the whole of the Hungarian economy and society.

scholarly journals Students’ readiness for international academic mobility programs: Evidence from Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature, University of Social Sciences and Humanities, VNUHCM

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 52-67
Author(s):  
Le Tan Cuong
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Higher Education ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Academic Mobility ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Mobility Programs ◽  
National University ◽  
Using Data ◽  
High Level

As a major aspect of internationalization, international academic mobility has been among the most discussed issues in higher education worldwide in recent years. However, while more and more institutions in many countries show substantial interest in implementing international academic mobility programs, the practices seem to be surprisingly in slow progress in Vietnam higher education . The current study, therefore, aims to fill up the gap by exploring the reality of implementing international academic mobility programs and surveying students’ readiness as well as expectations for international academic mobility programs in the setting of the faculty of English Linguistics and Literature, University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University- HCM city. Using data from a semi-structured interview with the faculty dean, a semi-structured interview with 5 students having just coming back from an international academic mobility program to the Philippines in early 2020 and a questionnaire among 78 students coming from 4 continuous cohorts, the findings evidence that (1) Intra-national mobility programs outperform the international ones, (2) Students expect more orientational activities and support from the faculty, (3) Students show high level of readiness for international academic mobility programs, (4) Students are more open-minded in choosing where to go and what to do during international academic mobility programs. Recommendations are well elaborated at the latter part of the study as references for institutions that are considering internationalizing their curricular. The study hopefully sheds light on the feasibility of implementing international academic mobility programs in the setting of Vietnam higher education.

scholarly journals The Uptake and Impact of a Label for Peer-Reviewed Books

2022 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eline Vandewalle ◽  
Raf Guns ◽  
Tim C. E. Engels
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Formal System ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Funding System ◽  
The Social ◽  
Book Publishers

This article presents an analysis of the uptake of the GPRC label (Guaranteed Peer Reviewed Content label) since its introduction in 2010 until 2019. GPRC is a label for books that have been peer reviewed introduced by the Flemish publishers association. The GPRC label allows locally published scholarly books to be included in the regional database for the Social Sciences and Humanities which is used in the Flemish performance-based research funding system. Ten years after the start of the GPRC label, this is the first systematic analysis of the uptake of the label. We use a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods. Our two main data sources are the Flemish regional database for the Social Sciences and Humanities, which currently includes 2,580 GPRC-labeled publications, and three interviews with experts on the GPRC label. Firstly, we study the importance of the label in the Flemish performance-based research funding system. Secondly, we analyse the label in terms of its possible effect on multilingualism and the local or international orientation of publications. Thirdly, we analyse to what extent the label has been used by the different disciplines. Lastly, we discuss the potential implications of the label for the peer review process among book publishers. We find that the GPRC label is of limited importance to the Flemish performance-based research funding system. However, we also conclude that the label has a specific use for locally oriented book publications and in particular for the discipline Law. Furthermore, by requiring publishers to adhere to a formalized peer review procedure, the label affects the peer review practices of local publishers because not all book publishers were using a formal system of peer review before the introduction of the label and even at those publishers who already practiced peer review, the label may have required the publishers to make these procedures more uniform.

scholarly journals SIOR: An Egalitarian Scientific Agora

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (8-9) ◽  
pp. 955-961
Author(s):  
Esther Oliver ◽  
Andrea Scharnhorst ◽  
Joan Cabré ◽  
Vladia Ionescu
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
International Level ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Unique Data ◽  
The Social ◽  
Data Source

The Social Impact Open Repository (SIOR) has become a unique data source at the international level in which researchers can display, quote, and store the social impact of their research results. SIOR arises from the social and political needs to know and connect with scientific projects to assess their social impact, promoting transparency of science and open-access systems. This repository has been designed to allow researchers to link their social impacts with research institutions and citizens. In short, SIOR reveals possibilities for transforming scientific research through means such as developing a qualitative tool as an egalitarian scientific agora that enables assessment of social improvements derived from social sciences and humanities (SSH) research. SIOR is a qualitative and open peer-review tool that allows citizens to comment online about an investigation’s impact on society.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document