Research on Scientific Journals: Implications for Editors and Authors

Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 1, pp. 83-104, 1982

23 Pages Posted: 8 Mar 2005 Last revised: 31 Dec 2011

See all articles by J. Scott Armstrong

J. Scott Armstrong

University of Pennsylvania - Marketing Department

Abstract

A review of editorial policies of leading journals and of research relevant to scientific journals revealed conflicts between "science" and "scientists." Owing to these conflicts, papers are often weak on objectivity and replicability. Furthermore, papers often fall short on importance, competence, intelligibility, or efficiency. Suggestions were made for editorial policies such as: (1) structured guidelines for referees, (2) open peer review, (3) blind reviews, and (4) full disclosure of data and method. Of major importance, an author's Note to Referees (describing the hypotheses and design, but not the results) was suggested to improve the objectivity of the ratings of importance and competence. Also, recommendations are made to authors for improving contributions to science (such as the use of multiple hypotheses) and for promoting their careers (such as using complex methods and obtuse writing).

Keywords: Management science, scientific journals, editors, authors

Suggested Citation

Armstrong, J. Scott, Research on Scientific Journals: Implications for Editors and Authors. Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 1, pp. 83-104, 1982. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=676102

J. Scott Armstrong (Contact Author)

University of Pennsylvania - Marketing Department ( email )

700 Jon M. Huntsman Hall
3730 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6340
United States
215-898-5087 (Phone)
215-898-2534 (Fax)

HOME PAGE: http://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/people/faculty/armstrong.cfm

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
37
Abstract Views
567
PlumX Metrics