IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v95y2013i1d10.1007_s11192-012-0879-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A quantitative study on the effectiveness of peer review for academic journals

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng Ma

    (Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China
    ISTIC-Thomson Reuters Joint Lab for Scientometrics Research)

  • Yuntao Pan

    (Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China
    ISTIC-Thomson Reuters Joint Lab for Scientometrics Research)

  • Zhenglu Yu

    (Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China)

  • Jingting Wang

    (Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China)

  • Jia Jia

    (Peking University)

  • Yishan Wu

    (Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China)

Abstract

Peer review is a classic method in the field of quality analysis, but the effectiveness of peer reviewing has never been researched using quantity analysis indicators. A new indicator for academic journals, Effectiveness of Peer Review (EPR), is defined for evaluating the effectiveness of peer reviewing. If the assumption is valid, EPR could be a simple indicator of such effectiveness. In a sample experiment, 28 academic journals were tested, and the EPR indicator was able to reflect accurately the academic impact of those journals.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng Ma & Yuntao Pan & Zhenglu Yu & Jingting Wang & Jia Jia & Yishan Wu, 2013. "A quantitative study on the effectiveness of peer review for academic journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 1-13, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:95:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0879-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0879-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0879-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-012-0879-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2004. "Sleeping Beauties in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 467-472, March.
    2. Spiro Stefanou & Kristiaan Kerstens, 2008. "Applied production analysis unveiled in open peer review: introductory remarks," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 1-6, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Justus Haucap & Johannes Muck, 2015. "What drives the relevance and reputation of economics journals? An update from a survey among economists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 849-877, June.
    2. J. Rigby & D. Cox & K. Julian, 2018. "Journal peer review: a bar or bridge? An analysis of a paper’s revision history and turnaround time, and the effect on citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1087-1105, March.
    3. Niccolò Casnici & Francisco Grimaldo & Nigel Gilbert & Pierpaolo Dondio & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2017. "Assessing peer review by gauging the fate of rejected manuscripts: the case of the Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 533-546, October.
    4. Aurora A. C. Teixeira & Pedro Cosme Vieira & Ana Patrícia Abreu, 2017. "Sleeping Beauties and their princes in innovation studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 541-580, February.
    5. J. A. Garcia & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia, 2019. "The optimal amount of information to provide in an academic manuscript," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1685-1705, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Yi & Huang, Ying & Porter, Alan L. & Zhang, Guangquan & Lu, Jie, 2019. "Discovering and forecasting interactions in big data research: A learning-enhanced bibliometric study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 795-807.
    2. András Schubert & Wolfgang Glänzel & Gábor Schubert, 2022. "Eponyms in science: famed or framed?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1199-1207, March.
    3. You Song & Fangling Situ & Hongjun Zhu & Jinzhi Lei, 2018. "To be the Prince to wake up Sleeping Beauty: the rediscovery of the delayed recognition studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 9-24, October.
    4. Craig Aaen-Stockdale, 2017. "Selfish Memes: An Update of Richard Dawkins’ Bibliometric Analysis of Key Papers in Sociobiology," Publications, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-9, May.
    5. Hui Fang, 2019. "A transition stage co-citation criterion for identifying the awakeners of sleeping beauty publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 307-322, October.
    6. Donya Rahmani, 2019. "Designing a robust and dynamic network for the emergency blood supply chain with the risk of disruptions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 613-641, December.
    7. Kosmulski, Marek, 2009. "New seniority-independent Hirsch-type index," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 341-347.
    8. Leo Egghe, 2007. "Probabilities for encountering genius, basic, ordinary or insignificant papers based on the cumulative nth citation distribution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 167-181, January.
    9. Soo Jeung Lee & Christian Schneijderberg & Yangson Kim & Isabel Steinhardt, 2021. "Have Academics’ Citation Patterns Changed in Response to the Rise of World University Rankings? A Test Using First-Citation Speeds," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, August.
    10. J Mingers, 2008. "Exploring the dynamics of journal citations: Modelling with s-curves," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(8), pages 1013-1025, August.
    11. Helena H. Zhang & Fred Y. Ye, 2020. "Identifying ‘associated-sleeping-beauties’ in ‘swan-groups’ based on small qualified datasets of physics and economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(3), pages 1525-1537, March.
    12. Thomas R. Anderson & Robin K. S. Hankin & Peter D. Killworth, 2008. "Beyond the Durfee square: Enhancing the h-index to score total publication output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(3), pages 577-588, September.
    13. Peter Kokol & Jernej Završnik & Helena Blažun Vošner, 2020. "Did Sleeping Papers in nursing research miss their target audience?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1243-1248, February.
    14. Zeng, Carl J. & Qi, Eric P. & Li, Simon S. & Stanley, H. Eugene & Ye, Fred Y., 2017. "Statistical characteristics of breakthrough discoveries in science using the metaphor of black and white swans," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 487(C), pages 40-46.
    15. Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2007. "Characteristic scores and scales," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 92-102.
    16. Björn Hammarfelt, 2011. "Interdisciplinarity and the intellectual base of literature studies: citation analysis of highly cited monographs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 705-725, March.
    17. Wen-Yau Cathy Lin, 2021. "Effects of open access and articles-in-press mechanisms on publishing lag and first-citation speed: a case on energy and fuels journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 4841-4869, June.
    18. Min, Chao & Sun, Jianjun & Pei, Lei & Ding, Ying, 2016. "Measuring delayed recognition for papers: Uneven weighted summation and total citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1153-1165.
    19. Thomas Heinze, 2013. "Creative accomplishments in science: definition, theoretical considerations, examples from science history, and bibliometric findings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 927-940, June.
    20. Aurora A. C. Teixeira & Pedro Cosme Vieira & Ana Patrícia Abreu, 2017. "Sleeping Beauties and their princes in innovation studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 541-580, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:95:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0879-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.