ERIC: Education Resources Information Center Skip main navigation

EJ736655 - Journal Reviewer Ratings: Issues of Particularistic Bias, Agreement, and Predictive Validity within the Manuscript Review Process

Help Tutorial Help | Tutorial Help | Tutorial Help With This Page Help With This Page
Record Details

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
Publisher's Web Site

Click on any of the links below to perform a new search
ERIC #:EJ736655
Title:Journal Reviewer Ratings: Issues of Particularistic Bias, Agreement, and Predictive Validity within the Manuscript Review Process
Authors:Vecchio, Robert P.
Descriptors:Predictive Validity; Periodicals; Writing for Publication; Citation Analysis; Bias; Evaluation Methods; Editing; Evaluators
Source:Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, v26 n3 p228-242 2006
More Info:
Help
Peer-Reviewed:
Yes
Publisher:SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com.
Publication Date:2006-00-00
Pages:15
Pub Types:Journal Articles; Reports - Evaluative
Abstract:Reviewer evaluations and recommendations for 853 manuscript submissions, over a span of 4 years, are analyzed for evidence of particularistic bias, reviewer agreement, and predictive validity for forecasting a published manuscript's citation impact. Attributes of the submitters, their affiliated institutions, and the reviewers have little consistent association with reviewers' recommendations or editorial decision outcomes. Furthermore, reviewers' recommendations demonstrate a reasonable degree of agreement. However, neither reviewers' evaluative ratings across five dimensions nor publication recommendations can predict the number of citations that a published article subsequently receives. Strengths and limitations of various features of the manuscript review process, as well as the importance of monitoring the process for particularistic biases and evidence of predictive validity, are discussed. (Contains 8 tables and 8 notes.)
Abstractor:Author
Reference Count:41

Note:N/A
Identifiers:N/A
Record Type:Journal
Level:N/A
Institutions:N/A
Sponsors:N/A
ISBN:N/A
ISSN:ISSN-0270-4676
Audiences:N/A
Languages:English
Education Level:N/A
 

ERIC Home