The value of peer review on the appointment criteria of Universities in Turkey

Abstract

Peer review is one of the issues that is emphasised meticulously in scholarly communication. Although it has been criticised from various aspects, there is not yet a structure as an alternative to peer review in the quality control procedures. These procedures in scientific publishing activities are mostly carried out by editors and referees, and sometimes publishers can also contribute. Although peer review has become a widely accepted structure in scientific publishing, there are serious concerns and controversies regarding the extent to which it is valued. Turkey is among the countries that has increased the production of scientific publications over time. However, the issue of how quantitative production is reflected in quality is controversial. In this study, the value attributed to peer reviewing by universities in Turkey is examined with respect to academic appointment criteria. The research findings reveal that some universities score peer reviewing while others do not in their criteria, pointing to the fact that peer reviewing activity is not made within a certain logic. When evaluated in general, it has been determined that the research evaluation system in Turkey is not consistent in terms of the value given to peer review for the appointment criteria of universities.