Peer Review for Journals: Evidence on Quality Control, Fairness, and Innovation
Science and Engineering Ethics, Vol. 3, pp. 63-84, 1997
33 Pages Posted: 15 Jan 2005 Last revised: 24 Feb 2015
I reviewed the published empirical evidence concerning journal peer review, which consisted of 68 papers, all but three published since 1975. Peer review improves quality, but its use to screen papers has met with limited success. Current procedures to assure quality and fairness seem to discourage scientific advancement, especially important innovations, because findings that conflict with current beliefs are often judged to have defects. Editors can use procedures to encourage the publication of papers with innovative findings such as invited papers, early-acceptance procedures, author nominations of reviewers, results-blind reviews, structured rating sheets, open peer review, and, in particular, electronic publication. Some journals are currently using these procedures. The basic principle behind the proposals is to change the decision from whether to publish a paper to how to publish it.
Keywords: Peer reviews, Control, Fairness, and Innovation
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Does the Need for Agreement Among Reviewers Inhibit the Publication of Controversial Findings?
Management Folklore and Management Science - on Portfolio Planning, Escalation Bias, and Such
Is Review by Peers as Fair as it Appears?
Last Writes? Re-Assessing the Law Review in the Age of Cyberspace
Yesterday Once More: Skeptics, Scribes and the Demise of Law Reviews
Incentives for Developing and Communicating Principles: A Reply
Reply to Miser's Commentary on 'Democracy Does Not Make Good Science: On Reforming Review Procedures for Management Science Journals'
Editorial Policies for the Publication of Controversial Findings
Factors Influencing Academic Research Productivity: A Survey of Management Scientists
Publishing Standards for Research in Forecasting (Editorial)