IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v127y2022i5d10.1007_s11192-022-04355-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Academic favoritism at work: insider bias in Turkish national journals

Author

Listed:
  • Lokman Tutuncu

    (Bulent Ecevit University)

  • Recep Yucedogru

    (Bulent Ecevit University)

  • Idris Sarisoy

    (Marmara University)

Abstract

The study utilizes a unique dataset of 16,575 research papers published in 68 national Business and Economics journals to investigate editorial bias towards insiders in Turkish academia. The study questions insiders’ motive for their choice of journal and predicts faster acceptance for papers that contain insider authors relative to the outsider papers in anticipation of favorable editorial treatment. The findings show that insiders not only publish in large numbers in their affiliated institutions’ journals but also do so at significantly faster speeds. Specifically, 4938 (29.79% of) papers have at least one insider author, and they are accepted 41.5 days faster than the average outsider submission. Papers in English, junior professors, and new-generation university journals are less likely to have insider authors; while papers in Turkish, senior professors, old-generation university journals, and papers originating from graduate theses are more likely. Remarkably, national journals indexed in ESCI do not engage in editorial favoritism towards insiders and require considerably longer time to accept submissions. As Turkish universities are leading publishers of academic journals, the findings have important implications for the Turkish academia. We note a declining trend of insider authorship and provide suggestions to mitigate insider bias.

Suggested Citation

  • Lokman Tutuncu & Recep Yucedogru & Idris Sarisoy, 2022. "Academic favoritism at work: insider bias in Turkish national journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2547-2576, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:127:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04355-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-022-04355-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-022-04355-0
    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/s11192-022-04355-0?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. Muller, Seán M, 2017. "Academics as rent seekers: distorted incentives in higher education, with reference to the South African case," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 58-67.
    2. Selcuk Besir Demir, 2018. "Pros and cons of the new financial support policy for Turkish researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2053-2068, September.
    3. Çetin Önder & Mehmet Sevkli & Taner Altinok & Cengiz Tavukçuoǧlu, 2008. "Institutional change and scientific research: A preliminary bibliometric analysis of institutional influences on Turkey’s recent social science publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(3), pages 543-560, September.
    4. Marshall H. Medoff, 2003. "Editorial Favoritism in Economics?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(2), pages 425-434, October.
    5. Teplitskiy, Misha & Acuna, Daniel & Elamrani-Raoult, Aïda & Körding, Konrad & Evans, James, 2018. "The sociology of scientific validity: How professional networks shape judgement in peer review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1825-1841.
    6. Cristina Blanco-Perez & Abel Brodeur, 2020. "Publication Bias and Editorial Statement on Negative Findings," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(629), pages 1226-1247.
    7. Alfredo Yegros Yegros & Carlos B. Amat, 2009. "Editorial delay of food research papers is influenced by authors’ experience but not by country of origin of the manuscripts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 367-380, November.
    8. Cruz-Castro, Laura & Sanz-Menéndez, Luis, 2010. "Mobility versus job stability: Assessing tenure and productivity outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 27-38, February.
    9. Ozlem Inanc & Onur Tuncer, 2011. "The effect of academic inbreeding on scientific effectiveness," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(3), pages 885-898, September.
    10. Maciej J. Mrowinski & Agata Fronczak & Piotr Fronczak & Olgica Nedic & Aleksandar Dekanski, 2020. "The hurdles of academic publishing from the perspective of journal editors: a case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 115-133, October.
    11. Shuo Xu & Mengjia An & Xin An, 2021. "Do scientific publications by editorial board members have shorter publication delays and then higher influence?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6697-6713, August.
    12. Laband, David N & Piette, Michael J, 1994. "Favoritism versus Search for Good Papers: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Behavior of Journal Editors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(1), pages 194-203, February.
    13. Marco Seeber & Alberto Bacchelli, 2017. "Does single blind peer review hinder newcomers?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 567-585, October.
    14. Russell Smyth & Vinod Mishra, 2014. "Academic inbreeding and research productivity and impact in Australian law schools," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 583-618, January.
    15. Christine Wennerås & Agnes Wold, 1997. "Nepotism and sexism in peer-review," Nature, Nature, vol. 387(6631), pages 341-343, May.
    16. Carmela Lutmar & Yaniv Reingewertz, 2021. "Academic in-group bias in the top five economics journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9543-9556, December.
    17. Hugo Horta & Francisco M. Veloso & Rócio Grediaga, 2010. "Navel Gazing: Academic Inbreeding and Scientific Productivity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(3), pages 414-429, March.
    18. Emre Sarigöl & David Garcia & Ingo Scholtes & Frank Schweitzer, 2017. "Quantifying the effect of editor–author relations on manuscript handling times," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 609-631, October.
    19. Khaled Moustafa, 2015. "Is there bias in editorial choice? Yes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2249-2251, December.
    20. Arcadio Navarro & Ana Rivero, 2001. "High rate of inbreeding in Spanish universities," Nature, Nature, vol. 410(6824), pages 14-14, March.
    21. Marshall H. Medoff, 2003. "Editorial Favoritism in Economics?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(2), pages 425-434, October.
    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. Lokman Tutuncu, 2023. "All-pervading insider bias alters review time in Turkish university journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3743-3791, June.

    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. Lokman Tutuncu, 2023. "All-pervading insider bias alters review time in Turkish university journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3743-3791, June.
    2. Luís Filipe Miranda Grochocki & Andrea Felippe Cabello, 2023. "Research collaboration networks in maturing academic environments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2535-2556, April.
    3. Grochocki, Luís Filipe de Miranda & Cabello, Andrea Felippe, 2022. "Academic endogamy or immobility? The impact on scholarly productivity in a developing country," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. Russell Smyth & Vinod Mishra, 2014. "Academic inbreeding and research productivity and impact in Australian law schools," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 583-618, January.
    5. Olga Gorelova & Andrey Lovakov, 2016. "Academic Inbreeding and Research Productivity Of Russian Faculty Members," HSE Working papers WP BRP 32/EDU/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    6. repec:hig:wpaper:32edu2015 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Petersen, Alexander M., 2019. "Megajournal mismanagement: Manuscript decision bias and anomalous editor activity at PLOS ONE," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    8. Engin Karadag & S. Koza Ciftci, 2022. "Deepening the Effects of the Academic Inbreeding: Its Impact on Individual and Institutional Research Productivity," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 63(6), pages 1015-1036, September.
    9. Bransch, Felix & Kvasnicka, Michael, 2022. "Male Gatekeepers: Gender Bias in the Publishing Process?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 714-732.
    10. Vadim N. Gureyev & Nikolay A. Mazov & Denis V. Kosyakov & Andrey E. Guskov, 2020. "Review and analysis of publications on scientific mobility: assessment of influence, motivation, and trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1599-1630, August.
    11. Bäker, Agnes, 2015. "Non-tenured post-doctoral researchers’ job mobility and research output: An analysis of the role of research discipline, department size, and coauthors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 634-650.
    12. Lawson, Nicholas, 2023. "What citation tests really tell us about bias in academic publishing," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    13. Horta, Hugo & Yudkevich, Maria, 2016. "The role of academic inbreeding in developing higher education systems: Challenges and possible solutions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 113(PB), pages 363-372.
    14. Borenstein, Denis & Perlin, Marcelo S. & Imasato, Takeyoshi, 2022. "The Academic Inbreeding Controversy: Analysis and Evidence from Brazil," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    15. Ann Mari May & Mary G. McGarvey & Yana Rodgers & Mark Killingsworth, 2021. "Critiques, Ethics, Prestige and Status: A Survey of Editors in Economics," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 295-318, April.
    16. Shibayama, Sotaro & Baba, Yasunori, 2015. "Impact-oriented science policies and scientific publication practices: The case of life sciences in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 936-950.
    17. Heintzelman Martin & Nocetti Diego, 2009. "Where Should we Submit our Manuscript? An Analysis of Journal Submission Strategies," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-28, September.
    18. Cheng Peng & Zhepeng (Lionel) Li & Chaojiang Wu, 2023. "Researcher geographic mobility and publication productivity: an investigation into individual and institutional characteristics and the roles of academicians," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 379-406, January.
    19. Si, Kao & Li, Yiwei & Ma, Chao & Guo, Feng, 2023. "Affiliation bias in peer review and the gender gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    20. Lawson, Cornelia & Geuna, Aldo & Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Toselli, Manuel & Kataishi, Rodrigo, 2015. "International Careers of Researchers in Biomedical Sciences: A Comparison of the US and the UK," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201514, University of Turin.
    21. Cloos, Janis & Greiff, Matthias & Rusch, Hannes, 2020. "Geographical Concentration and Editorial Favoritism within the Field of Laboratory Experimental Economics (RM/19/029-revised-)," Research Memorandum 014, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).

    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:127:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04355-0. 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.