共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 342 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
从稿件本身入手准确遴选审稿人 总被引：9，自引：3，他引：6
阐述综合性科技期刊编辑针对一篇具体的来稿选择审稿人的方法。从稿件的题名或关键词、作者信息、参考文献等方面入手,分析利用网络选择审稿人的特点及注意事项,以期解决"送审"这一编辑工作中的难点问题,提高审稿质量。 相似文献
7.
8.
审稿是期刊筛选论文、确保刊发论文质量的重要手段,审稿过程可能会受到审稿人、编辑和作者有意或无意的偏倚的影响而导致审稿结果失实。本文总结了医学论文常见审稿偏倚,如内容偏倚、保守偏倚、利益冲突、作者身份或地域偏倚等问题,对目前国内外期刊现有的审稿模式进行讨论并提出建议。各期刊可结合自身实际情况,采取一种或多种审稿模式;谨慎选择审稿人,既要“对口”送审,又要避免利益冲突;避免审稿一票否决,严格落实三审制度;尊重作者的科研成果,建立作者申诉机制。基于此,确保论文的优势得到承认,弱点得到剖析,为作者提供具有建设性的修改意见,帮助作者提高科学研究及论文撰写的水平,最大限度地减少审稿过程中出现偏倚。 相似文献
9.
What influences the regional diversity of reviewers: A study of medical and agricultural/biological sciences journals 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 There is evidence of a geographical imbalance of reviewers, leading to concerns about the sustainability of peer review to ensure high‐quality, timely publications. This research evaluated articles submitted during 2016 to 149 Wiley‐owned journals in two disciplines: medicine (112 journals), and agricultural and biological sciences (37). We compared the reviewer location with the location of the author and the Editor‐in‐Chief, the size and rank of the journal, and whether the journal had difficulty in obtaining reviews. We found that reviewers mostly came from the USA, but there was a correlation between the reviewer location and the country and region of the Editor‐in‐Chief and that of the corresponding author. Reviewers were also more likely to accept invitations to review articles when the corresponding author was from their region and were more likely to be positive about such articles. We found no difference between journals of different disciplines and of different rank or size or difficulty in obtaining reviews. 相似文献
10.
11.
Noel McGlinchey Tom Hunter Jack Bromley Ruth Fisher Anna Debiec‐Waszak Thomas Gaston 《Learned Publishing》2019,32(1):37-46
The study aimed to find whether journal editorial office administrators were as effective as editors at assigning rigorous reviewers. We analysed four journals using blended systems of editor‐selected reviewers (ESR) and Journal Administrator‐selected reviewers (JASR) from four disciplines: medicine, sociology, education, and business/applied psychology. In blended journals, both editors and Journal Administrators select authors to review using web‐based expert‐finding tools. All reviewers selected were both authors and reviewers. We primarily wanted to assess the quality of reviews from both ESR and JASR reviewer selection methodologies. Reviewer rigour was defined as differences between editor decisions and reviewer recommendations. Timeliness data were also recorded and analysed separately as an indicator of efficiency. Reviewer rigour, the quality of reviewers’ evaluations, was estimated from the level of agreement between editors and reviewers. Timeliness was not considered a direct measure of rigour. For two journals, no statistically significant differences were observed; for two, in a small proportion of cases, ESR reviews were more negative. One journal showed some statistically significant major differences but only in 2% of reviews. Timeliness data indicated some statistically significant trends that JASR return reviews more promptly. Therefore, where editors rely on at least two reviewers’ recommendations, JASR is equally rigorous as ESR. 相似文献
12.
努力克服高校学报稿件处理中非理性因素的影响 总被引：3，自引：2，他引：1
由于人情关系等原因 ,使得高校学报编辑部在稿件处理中常常受到许多非理性因素的影响 ,从而影响到学报的整体质量。要克服这些因素的影响 ,学报负责人首先要以身作则 ,严把质量关 ;应实行责任编辑和审稿专家署名制 ;在专家审稿环节中实行“内审”和“外审”相结合 相似文献
13.
Mike Thelwall Carol Bailey Meiko Makita Pardeep Sud Devika P. Madalli 《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(1):118-131
Women’s access to academic careers has been historically limited by discrimination and cultural constraints. Comprehensive information about gender inequality within disciplines is needed to understand the problem and target remedial action. India is the fifth largest research producer but has a low international index of gender inequality and so is an important case. This study assesses gender inequalities in Indian journal article publishing in 2017 for 186 research fields. It also seeks overall gender differences in interests across academia by comparing the terms used in 27,710 articles with an Indian male or female first author. The data show that there are at least 1.5 male first authors per female first author in each of 26 broad fields and 2.8 male first authors per female first author overall. Compared to the USA, India has a much lower share of female first authors but smaller variations in gender differences between broad fields. Dentistry, Economics and Maths are all more female in India, but Veterinary is much less female than in the USA. There is a tendency for males to research thing-oriented topics and for females to research helping people and some life science topics. More initiatives to promote gender equality in science are needed to address the overall imbalance, but care should be taken to avoid creating the larger between-field gender differences found in the USA. 相似文献
14.
15.
Verity Warne 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(1):41-50
In July 2015, Wiley surveyed over 170,000 researchers in order to explore peer reviewing experience; attitudes towards recognition and reward for reviewers; and training requirements. The survey received 2,982 usable responses (a response rate of 1.7%). Respondents from all markets indicated similar levels of review activity. However, analysis of reviewer and corresponding author data suggests that US researchers in fact bear a disproportionate burden of review, while Chinese authors publish twice as much as they review. Results show that while reviewers choose to review in order to give back to the community, there is more perceived benefit in interacting with the community of a top‐ranking journal than a low‐ranking one. The majority of peer review training received by respondents has come either in the form of journal guidelines or informally as advice from supervisors or colleagues. Seventy‐seven per cent show an interest in receiving further reviewer training. Reviewers strongly believe that reviewing is inadequately acknowledged at present and should carry more weight in their institutions' evaluation process. Respondents value recognition initiatives related to receiving feedback from the journal over monetary rewards and payment in kind. Questions raised include how to evenly expand the reviewer pool, provide training throughout the researcher career arc, and deliver consistent evaluation and recognition for reviewers. 相似文献
16.
Should authors suggest reviewers? A comparative study of the performance of author‐suggested and editor‐selected reviewers at a biological journal 下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Yan Liang 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(3):216-221
To evaluate peer review of author‐suggested reviewers (Ra), this research compared them with editor‐selected reviewers (Re) using 1‐year data collected from Journal of Systematics and Evolution. The results indicated that (1) Ra responded more positively than Re, that is, accepted invitations to review more often, more likely to suggest alternative reviewers, and less likely to neglect a review invitation; (2) there was no statistically significant difference in timeliness between Ra and Re; (3) editors rated Re reviews of higher quality than Ra reviews, but the word count length of these reviews did not differ statistically; (4) Ra made more favourable publication recommendations than Re; and (5) Ra were more often based in the country of the authors than Re, and this correlated with the location effect on reviewer response and publication recommendations. These results suggest that authors should be encouraged to suggest reviewers. However, in terms of policy or procedure based on the results of this study, journals/editors should collect and consult at least one review from other sources than author suggested, and when reviewers nominated by authors are considered, priority should be given to those with different locations from the authors. 相似文献
17.
18.
通过对《中国天然药物》200篇稿件的同行评议结果的分析,发现作者推荐审稿人较少能做到客观评价,存在较严重利益冲突问题。据此,提出相关的建议:在投稿须知中对推荐审稿人以及审稿的注意事项作出要求;注意作者与推荐审稿人之间的利益关系;选择推荐审稿人的同时最好再选2位其他审稿人;用推荐的审稿人审其他相关文章;建立完善的申诉机制和反馈机制。 相似文献
19.
不同文种"一稿两投"的国际规范及我国应采取的编辑政策 总被引：8，自引：0，他引：8
就生物医学论文以不同的文种、在不同的国家再次发表的行业国际规范进行调研,认定同一论文以不同的文种在国内外生物医学期刊上相继发表不属于国际生物医学期刊界违反版权法和科学道德的一稿多投行为.提出为了既有利于扩大我国高水平的生物医学科研成果在国际上的影响,又能使这些成果在国内学术期刊上有所反映,满足国内广大读者的需要, 可以将在国际生物医学期刊上发表的英文论文以中文全文再次发表在国内生物医学期刊上, 或以"述评""摘要"等多种形式在国内生物医学期刊上予以介绍.然而中文全文的再次发表必须是有选择的、有比例的,同时必须满足国际规范的各项规定和要求. 相似文献
20.
国内许多学术期刊对作者与审稿人的学术交流与沟通重视不够.由于“评议偏倚”在同行评议中的现实存在,作者往往有着强烈的沟通需求;但在现行盲审制度下,编辑部既不能公开审稿人的信息,也难以做到双方意见的深入交流.为此,本文就作者与匿名审稿人双向学术交流的实施策略和方法进行讨论和分析. 相似文献