SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Exploring the Black Box of Journal Manuscript Review: A Survey of Social Science Journal Editors
10 references·0 citing·42 second hop
Exploring the Black Box of Journal Manuscript Review: A Survey of Social Science Journal Editors (2013)Exploring the Black Box of Journal Manusc…Cracking Open the Black Box of the Manuscript Review Process: A Look Inside Justice Quarterly (2012)Cracking Open the Black Box o…Quality and Peer Review of Research: An Adjudicating Role for Editors (2010)Quality and Peer Review of Re…A Reliability-Generalization Study of Journal Peer Reviews: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Inter-Rater Reliability and Its Determinants (2010)A Reliability-Generalization …The Quantitative/Qualitative Divide Revisited: A Study of Published Research, Doctoral Program Curricula, and Journal Editor Perceptions (2008)The Quantitative/Qualitative …Reviewers' Views on Reviewing: An Examination of the Peer Review Process in Criminal Justice (2008)Reviewers' Views on Reviewing…Editorial Favoritism in Economics? (2003)Editorial Favoritism in Econo…Back Stage atSocial Problems: An Analysis of the Editorial Decision Process, 1993–1996 (2001)Back Stage atSocial Problems:…Favoritism versus Search for Good Papers: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Behavior of Journal Editors (1994)Favoritism versus Search for …The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation (1991)The reliability of peer revie…The Manuscript Review and Decision-Making Process (1987)The Manuscript Review and Dec…The Handbook of Social Psychology (1969)The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. (1971)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Reviewing the review process: Identifying sources of delay (2012)Motivations for performing scholarly prepublication peer review: A scoping review (2020)Gender inequality and self-publication are common among academic editors (2023)The Matthew effect in science. The reward and communication systems of science are considered. (1968)How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists (1994)The Relative Impacts of Economics Journals: 1970-1990 (1994)The Game Academics Play: Editors versus Authors (2005)Interlocking editorship. A network analysis of the links between economic journals (2009)The skewed few: people and papers of quality in management studies (2011)Scholarly Consensus and Journal Rejection Rates (1988)Science, the very idea (1988)An Assessment of Criminal Justice and Criminology Journal Prestige∗ (2006)What methods are most frequently used in research in criminology and criminal justice? (2006)A Content Analysis of Ethnographic Research Published in Top Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals from 2000 to 2009 (2010)A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)Scientific Culture and Educational Research (2002)Scientific Culture and Educational Research (2005)Self and Peer Assessment in School and University: Reliability, Validity and Utility (2006)Meta-analysis in clinical trials (1986)Introduction to Meta‐Analysis (2009)The N-Pact Factor: Evaluating the Quality of Empirical Journals with Respect to Sample Size and Statistical Power (2014)Professional and citizen bibliometrics: complementarities and ambivalences in the development and use of indicators—a state-of-the-art report (2016)The application of meta-analytic (multi-level) models with multiple random effects: A systematic review (2020)Web Surveys (2000)Moving through the Faculty Ranks: An Exploratory Study on the Perceived Importance of Book Publishing and Publishing in Peer‐Reviewed Journals in Criminology/Criminal Justice (2010)Reading Peer Review (2020)Fundamental problems in the peer‐review process and stakeholders' perceptions of potential suggestions for improvement (2024)Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalisation, structure and functions of the referee system (1971)DETERMINANTS OF FACULTY PAY: AN AGENCY THEORY PERSPECTIVE. (1992)Must Identity Movements Self-Destruct? A Queer Dilemma (1995)Epilogue: Trade-Offs among Editorial Goals in Complex Publishing Environments (2008)Paradigm Development and Particularism: Journal Publication in Three Scientific Disciplines (1977)Editorial Policies and Practices Among Leading Journals in Four Scientific Fields (1978)The Use of Bibliometrics to Measure Research Performance in Education Sciences (2012)What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior (2008)The Superiority of Economists (2015)Publishing and Promotion in Economics: The Tyranny of the Top Five (2020)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 1991The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation496 cited
  • 1994Favoritism versus Search for Good Papers: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Behavior of Journal Editors305 cited
  • 2010A Reliability-Generalization Study of Journal Peer Reviews: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Inter-Rater Reliability and Its Determinants232 cited
  • 1987The Manuscript Review and Decision-Making Process200 cited
  • 2003Editorial Favoritism in Economics?83 cited
  • 2010Quality and Peer Review of Research: An Adjudicating Role for Editors73 cited
  • 2008The Quantitative/Qualitative Divide Revisited: A Study of Published Research, Doctoral Program Curricula, and Journal Editor Perceptions69 cited
  • 2008Reviewers' Views on Reviewing: An Examination of the Peer Review Process in Criminal Justice19 cited
  • 2001Back Stage atSocial Problems: An Analysis of the Editorial Decision Process, 1993–199615 cited
  • 2012Cracking Open the Black Box of the Manuscript Review Process: A Look Inside Justice Quarterly13 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work