Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again

@article{Peters1982PeerreviewPO,
  title={Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again},
  author={Douglas P. Peters and Stephen J. Ceci},
  journal={Behavioral and Brain Sciences},
  year={1982},
  volume={5},
  pages={187 - 195}
}
Abstract A growing interest in and concern about the adequacy and fairness of modern peer-review practices in publication and funding are apparent across a wide range of scientific disciplines. Although questions about reliability, accountability, reviewer bias, and competence have been raised, there has been very little direct research on these variables. The present investigation was an attempt to study the peer-review process directly, in the natural setting of actual journal referee… 

Administrative freedom versus academic freedom and peer reviews

  • R. Berry
  • Psychology
    Behavioral and Brain Sciences
  • 1985
of the original article: A growing interest in and concern about the adequacy and fairness of modern peer-review practices in publication and funding are apparent across a wide range of scientific

Peer review: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

of the original article: A growing interest in and concern about the adequacy and fairness of modern peer-review practices in publication and funding are apparent across a wide range of scientific

Author ' s Response Peer review : Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

of the original article: A growing interest in and concern about the adequacy and fairness of modern peer-review practices in publication and funding are apparent across a wide range of scientific

The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation

Abstract The reliability of peer review of scientific documents and the evaluative criteria scientists use to judge the work of their peers are critically reexamined with special attention to the

Journal policies and editors’ opinions on peer review

A survey of 322 editors of journals in ecology, economics, medicine, physics and psychology found that 49% of the journals surveyed checked all manuscripts for plagiarism, that 61% allowed authors to recommend both for and against specific reviewers, and that less than 6% used a form of open peer review.

Improving the peer-review process for grant applications: reliability, validity, bias, and generalizability.

The authors propose a new approach, the reader system, which they evaluated with psychology and education grant proposals and found to be substantially more reliable and strategically advantageous than traditional peer reviews of grant applications.

Journal response time: A case for multiple submission

The reliability of peer review of scientific documents and the evaluative criteria scientists use to judge the work of their peers are critically reexamined with special attention to the consistently

Comment: Blind Peer Review of Journal Articles

The study found that less than 20 percent of the medical journals surveyed do not blind reviewers to the source of manuscripts submitted for publication, which raises several issues important to pharmacists.

Confirmational Response Bias and the Quality of the Editorial Processes Among American Social Work Journals

Objective: To experimentally test for confirmational response bias among social work journals and to assess the time-liness and quality of the referee review process. Method: A positive and a

Pride and prejudice – What can we learn from peer review?

The findings suggest that more widespread open peer reviewing could improve the educational value of peer review, increase the constructive criticism that encourages researchers, and reduce pride and prejudice in editorial processes.
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 196 REFERENCES

IMPROVING MANUSCRIPT EVALUATION PROCEDURES

Convention program committees face a similar problem in selecting papers for presentation, although the published complaints usually focus exclusively on frustrations encountered in dealings with the journals.

Research on Scientific Journals: Implications for Editors and Authors

A review of editorial policies of leading journals and of research relevant to scientific journals revealed conflicts between 'science' and 'scientists' and papers are often weak on objectivity and replicability.

Peer review in biomedical publication.

What Economists Think of Their Journals

Economists tend to accord widely varying degrees of respect to the many different journals and alternative publication media available to them. Even though colleagues in casual luncheon conversation

Peer Review at the NSF: A Dialectical Policy Analysis

The controversy over peer review is viewed as a dialectic. The arguments espoused by advocates and critics of the system wherein research proposals are evaluated by advisors to funding agencies are

Review Paper : Psychology of the Scientist: An Evaluative Review

Although the social processes in scientific inquiry have received extensive analysis, psychologists have devoted relatively little attention to the thoughts, feelings, and actions of the individual

Productivity and scholarly impact (citations) of British, Canadian, and U.S. departments of psychology (1975).

The psychology departments at 180 universities in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States were evaluated in terms of their productivity and the impact of their scholarly research. The 1975

The Structure of Scientific Fields and the Allocation of Editorships on Scientific Journals: Some Observations on the Politics of Knowledge*

This study examines editorial appointment patterns in journals representing seven scientific disciplines: physics, chemistry, biology, economics, psychology, political science, sociology. Social

Psychology of Scientist: XXX. Credibility of Psychologists: An Empirical Study

In order to evaluate the effects of bias among psychologists, two virtually identical abstracts of presumably empirical research in the area of astrology were prepared, one with positive findings and

Scaling the Ivory Tower: Merit and Its Limits in Academic Careers

Following in the tradition of Thorstein Veblen's Higher Learning in America, Lionel S. Lewis has amassed solid evidence to support his conclusions about what leads to success in Scaling the Ivory
...