Research on Scientific Journals: Implications for Editors and Authors
A review of editorial policies of leading journals and of research relevant to scientific journals revealed conflicts between 'science' and 'scientists.” Owing to these conflicts, papers are often weak on objectivity and replicability. Furthermore, papers often fall short on importance, competence, intelligibility, or efficiency. Suggestions were made for editorial policies such as: (1) structured guidelines for referees, (2) open peer review, (3) blind reviews, and (4) full disclosure of data and method. Of major importance, an author's “Note to Referees” (describing the hypotheses and design, but not the results) was suggested to improve the objectivity of the ratings of importance and competence. Also, recommendations are made to authors for improving contributions to science (such as the use of multiple hypotheses) and for promoting their careers (such as using complex methods and obtuse writing).
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Moravcsik, Michael J., 1974. "A refinement of extrinsic criteria for scientific choice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 88-97, April.
- JS Armstrong, 2005.
"Advocacy and Objectivity in Science,"
General Economics and Teaching
- William R. King & Ralph H. Kilmann & Kenneth Sochats, 1978. "Designing Scientific Journals: Issues and Survey Results," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(7), pages 774-784, March.
- Russell L. Ackoff, 1967. "Management Misinformation Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 147-156, December.
- JS Armstrong, 2005. "Barriers to Scientific Contributions: The Author’s Formula," General Economics and Teaching 0502057, EconWPA.
- Siegfried, John J, 1970. "A First Lesson in Econometrics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(6), pages 1378-1379, Nov.-Dec..
- Ian I. Mitroff, 1972. "The Myth of Objectivity OR Why Science Needs a New Psychology of Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(10), pages 613-618, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0502059. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (EconWPA)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.