Ken,
I think you misunderstand my position. I adhere to the same peer-review
standards of all edited publications. But like many academics today, I am
not convinced that the opinion of reviewers should be in any way binding on
my decisions. Take a look at this article where another academic criticises
the peer-review system:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientific-peer-reviews-are-a-sacred-cow-ready-to-be-slaughtered-says-former-editor-of-bmj-10196077.html
I don't think without having access to my CV you can make any judgement as
to my academic credentials. I regularly review for other journals, many
whom get in contact with me directly if the paper is on social media and
its effects.
But being in the private sector and not the public sector I see it as
inefficient to ask for a paper to be reviewed if I have not already decided
to accept in. When I advertise jobs, the only time I invite a candidate to
a face-to-face interview is when I have already decided to offer them a job
based on their submissions. It might be that if journals had to pay
reviewers for their time they would be less likely to waste it with papers
they are unlikely to accept for whatever reason.
I once submitted a paper to Nature, which wasn't sent for review. Whilst I
didn't like it at the time, having now edited or co-edited several books
and special issues, I have adopted such a policy.
Jonathan
Jonathan Bishop
BSc(Hons), MSc, MScEcon, LLM
FRSS, FRAI, FRSA, FCLIP, FBCS CITP
Author of over 75 research publications.
Editor of Examining the Concepts, Issues and Implications of Internet
Trolling, Transforming Politics and Policy in the Digital Age, and
Gamification for Human Factors Integration: Social, Educational and
Psychological Issues
Envoyé par mon ordinateur
On Saturday, 6 June 2015, Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[log in to unmask]);>> wrote:
> Dear Mx. Bishop,
>
> While I understand your position, I take a different view. I am aware that
> some organisations seem to believe that rejection rate equals high quality.
> Serious journals and serious research organisations do not use this as a
> metric. The key metrics are impact factor and coverage in ISI Web of
> Science, Scopus, or both. If publishers and organisations use inappropriate
> metrics, I’d suggest choosing different target journals.
>
> Nevertheless, general reader interest based on public journalism is not a
> valid criterion for choosing research articles. Recent news stories suggest
> that choosing articles based on “reader interest” rather than scientific
> value lead to scandals and retractions — often in the same newspapers that
> covered catchy but poorly reviewed articles. The New York Times recently
> published several articles on this problem: Editorial Board (2015), Roston
> (2015), Scheiber (2015).
>
> Since you edit for journalistic reader interest while I edit a
> peer-reviewed research journal, we are in different fields. Our goals are
> different, and our standards and methods will differ. Since our background
> and editorial goals differ, I do not expect you to share my views. Since
> you are a journalist, however, I do expect that you should describe the
> editorial work of a research journal based on what actually takes place in
> the field.
>
> In this respect, I disagree with your understanding of what it means to
> edit a research journal. The editor of a peer-reviewed research journal is
> far more than “a glorified review handler.” I am an editor and advisor for
> half a dozen peer reviewed journals, and editor-in-chief of a new journal,
> so I have some experience with research journals. Every editor makes a wide
> range of strategic and tactical decisions, working with editors,
> publishers, staff, and authors to realise the goals of the journal.
>
> Two recent books describe the editorial process of a research journal in
> detail: Opening the Black Box of Editorship by Baruch, Konrad, Aguinis, and
> Starbuck (2008), and What Editors Want: An Author's Guide to Scientific
> Journal Publishing by Benson and Silver (2013).
>
> This is my second post on this topic. It is time for me to stop here and
> leave the floor to others.
>
> Warm wishes,
>
> Ken
>
> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The
> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Elsevier in
> Cooperation with Tongji University Press | Launching in 2015
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>
> --
>
> References
>
> Baruch, Yehudi, Alison M. Konrad, Herman Aguinis, and William H. Starbuck.
> 2008. Opening the Black Box of Editorship. London: Palsgrave Macmillan.
>
> Benson, Phillipa, and Susan Silver. 2013. What Editors Want: An Author's
> Guide to Scientific Journal Publishing. (Chicago Guides to Writing,
> Editing, and Publishing.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
>
> Editorial Board. 2015. “Scientists Who Cheat.” The New York Times, June 1,
> 2015. URL
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/01/opinion/scientists-who-cheat.html?_r=0
>
> Roston, Michael. 2015. “Retracted Scientific Studies: A Growing List.” New
> York Times, May 28, 2015. URL:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/28/science/retractions-scientific-studies.html
>
> Scheiber, Noam. 2015. "Beyond Publish or Perish, Academic Papers Look to
> Make a Splash.” New York Times, May 31, 2015. URL:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/01/business/beyond-publish-or-perish-scientific-papers-look-to-make-splash.html?_r=0
>
>
--
Jonathan Bishop
BSc(Hons), MSc, MScEcon, LLM
FRSS, FRAI, FRSA, FCLIP, FBCS CITP
Author of over 75 research publications.
Editor of Examining the Concepts, Issues and Implications of Internet
Trolling, Transforming Politics and Policy in the Digital Age, and
Gamification for Human Factors Integration: Social, Educational and
Psychological Issues
Envoyé par mon ordinateur
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|