Affiliation:
1. Chinese University of Hong Kong
Abstract
This article reports the results of a study of confirmational response bias among social work journals. A contrived research paper with positive findings and its negative mirror image were submitted to two different groups of social work journals and to two comparison groups of journals outside social work. The quantitative results, suggesting bias, are tentative; but the qualitative findings based upon an analysis of the referee comments are clear and consistent. Few referees from prestigious or nonprestcgrous social work journals prepared reviews that were knowledgeable, scientifically astute, or objective. The best reviews came from journals outside of soccal work or from journals that are accepted as social work journals but originate with other disciplines.
Subject
Human-Computer Interaction,Economics and Econometrics,Sociology and Political Science,Philosophy,Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Anthropology
Reference17 articles.
1. Much ado about Peer Review
2. Peer Review: Improving Editorial Procedures
3. Cummings, L.L., P.J. Frost, and T.F. Vakil. 1985. The manuscript review process: A view from the inside on coaches, critics and special cases. In Publishing in the organizational sciences, edited by L. L. Cummings and P. J. Frost, 471-73. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
Cited by
114 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献