IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamest/v39y1988i6p400-407.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reviewing the gatekeepers: A survey of referees of library journals

Author

Listed:
  • Stuart Glogoff

Abstract

A survey of referees of scholarly journals in librarianship was conducted to gather information on referees' practices and attitudes, their perceptions of their role in the editorial process, and background information that might reveal relevant information on experience and qualifications for serving as a referee. One hundred ninety‐nine surveys were mailed to referees and 121 responses were returned. The responses indicated that half the referees do not work with a formal evaluation criteria guideline but consistently regard validity of claims and originality as the two categories on which most emphasis is placed when reviewing a manuscript. Overwhelming support was expressed for returning comments to submitting authors but a curiously high number of referees do not know if this is the journal editor's practice. Furthermore, approximately 75% of the referees were uninformed by the editor of a reviewed manuscript's final disposition. The majority of referees for scholarly journals in librarianship are employed in academic libraries and schools of library and information science, hold a position of responsibility in a professional association and are successful in publishing articles in librarianship. © 1988 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Suggested Citation

  • Stuart Glogoff, 1988. "Reviewing the gatekeepers: A survey of referees of library journals," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 39(6), pages 400-407, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamest:v:39:y:1988:i:6:p:400-407
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(198811)39:63.0.CO;2-Q
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(198811)39:63.0.CO;2-Q
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(198811)39:63.0.CO;2-Q?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Chaoqun Ni & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Blaise Cronin, 2013. "Visualizing and comparing four facets of scholarly communication: producers, artifacts, concepts, and gatekeepers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1161-1173, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:jamest:v:39:y:1988:i:6:p:400-407. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    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.