Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Academic Ethics 2 (4):355-366 (2005)
|Abstract||In some recent articles, Dr. Leigh Turner [Doffing the Mask: Why Manuscript Reviewers Ought to Be Identifiable,” Journal of Academic Ethics, 1 (2003), pp. 41–48; “Promoting F.A.I.T.H. in Peer Review: Five Core Attributes in Effective Peer Review,” Journal of Academic Ethics, 1 (2003), pp. 181–188.] makes some rather critical observations regarding the processes of peer-review in academic journals. I shall note them in turn, note wherein I concur and wherein I disagree, and discuss some of Turner's suggestions to resolve such difficulties. It is hoped that my comments on Turner's much-appreciated points will engage readers of this august and well-edited journal to take more seriously Turner's arguments for the sake of the betterment of academic research.|
|Keywords||academic accountability editor ethics journal peer-review referee referees' reports, responsibility rights|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Arthur Stamps (1997). Using a Dialectical Scientific Brief in Peer Review. Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1).
Arthur E. Stamps (1997). Advances in Peer Review Research: An Introduction. Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1).
Helene Marsh & Carole M. Eros (1999). Ethics of Field Research: Do Journals Set the Standard? Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (3):375-382.
Tim Barnett, Ken Bass & Gene Brown (1996). Religiosity, Ethical Ideology, and Intentions to Report a Peer's Wrongdoing. Journal of Business Ethics 15 (11):1161 - 1174.
David B. Resnik, Christina Gutierrez-Ford & Shyamal Peddada (2008). Perceptions of Ethical Problems with Scientific Journal Peer Review: An Exploratory Study. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3):305-310.
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.
Ronald N. Kostoff (1997). The Principles and Practices of Peer Review. Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):19-34.
Leigh Turner (2003). Doffing the Mask: Why Manuscript Reviewers Ought to Be Identifiable. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 1 (1):41-48.
J. Angelo Corlett (2008). The Ethics of Academic Journal Editing. Journal of Academic Ethics 6 (3):205-209.
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.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #114,518 of 740,918 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,802 of 740,918 )
How can I increase my downloads?