David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Business Ethics 11 (2):95 - 104 (1992)
The pressure for publication is ever present in academe. Rules for submission are elucidated by conferences, proceedings and journals for the benefit of authors; however, the rules for reviewers and editors are not so well established or consistent. This treatise examines examples of abuse of the editorial process and points to a need for formal recognition of rules for review. The manuscript culminates with proposed Codes of Ethics for researchers, referees and editors and suggestions for improvement of the peer review process.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Amit Saini & Mike Krush (2008). Anomie and the Marketing Function: The Role of Control Mechanisms. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 83 (4):845 - 863.
Wendy Lipworth, Ian Kerridge, Stacy Carter & Miles Little (2011). Should Biomedical Publishing Be “Opened Up”? Toward a Values-Based Peer-Review Process. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 8 (3):267-280.
Susan C. Borkowski & Mary Jeanne Welsh (2000). Ethical Practice in the Accounting Publishing Process: Contrasting Opinions of Authors and Editors. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 25 (1):15 - 31.
Susan Haack (2007). Peer Review and Publication: Lessons for Lawyers. Stetson Law Review 36 (3).
Susan C. Borkowski & Mary Jeanne Welsh (1998). Ethics and the Accounting Publishing Process: Author, Reviewer, and Editor Issues. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 17 (16):1785-1803.
Leigh Turner (2003). Promoting F.A.I.T.H. In Peer Review: Five Core Attributes of Effective Peer Review. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 1 (2):181-188.
Peter Williams & Elizabeth Wager (2013). Exploring Why and How Journal Editors Retract Articles: Findings From a Qualitative Study. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):1-11.
Domenic V. Cicchetti (1997). Referees, Editors, and Publication Practices: Improving the Reliability and Usefulness of the Peer Review System. Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):51-62.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?