The author–editor game

Scientometrics

Volumn 104, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 361-380

  Garcia J A ^a   Rodriguez Sánchez, Rosa ^a   Fdez Valdivia, J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Academic journal; Author; Bias; Editor; Manuscript quality control; Peer review

Indexed keywords

EID: 84930822241     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: 15882861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1566-x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Besancenot, D., Huynh, K., & Faria, J. (2012). Search and research: The influence of editorial boards on journals quality. Theory and Decision, 73(4), 687–702.
2. Bohannon, J. (2013). Who’s afraid of peer review? Science, 342, 60–65.
3. Bornmann, L. (2008). Scientific peer review. An analysis of the peer review process from the perspective of sociology of science theories. Human Architecture-Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge, 6(2), 23–38.
4. Bornmann, L. (2012). The Hawthorne effect in journal peer review. Scientometrics, 91, 857–862. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0547-y.
5. Bornmann, L. (2014). Book review: Gould, T.H.P. (2013). Do we still need peer review? An argument for change. Scarecrow Press: Plymouth, UK. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,65(1), 209–213.
6. Bubb, R., & Warren, P. L. (2013). Optimal agency bias and regulatory review. NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 12–69; NYU Law and Economics Research Paper No. 12–47. SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2201042 or doi:10.2139/ssrn.2201042.
7. Campanario, J. M. (1998a). Peer review for journals as it stands today—part 1. Science Communication, 19(3), 181–211.
8. Campanario, J. M. (1998b). Peer review for journals as it stands today—part 2. Science Communication, 19(4), 277–306.
9. Garcia, J. A., Rodriguez-Sanchez, R., & Fdez-Valdivia, J. (2014a). The principal-agent problem in peer review. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(2), 297–308. doi:10.1002/asi.23169.
10. Garcia, J. A., Rodriguez-Sanchez, R., & Fdez-Valdivia, J. (2014b). Adverse selection of reviewers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. doi:10.1002/asi.23249.
11. Garcia, J. A., Rodriguez-Sanchez, R., & Fdez-Valdivia, J. (2015). Bias and effort in peer review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. doi:10.1002/asi.23307.
12. Heintzelman, M., & Nocetti, D. (2009). Where should we submit our manuscript? An analysis of journal submission strategies. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy, 9(1), 39.
13. Lee, C. J., Sugimoto, C. R., Zhang, G., & Cronin, B. (2013). Bias in peer review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(1), 2–17.
14. Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Osborne, M. J. (2003). An introduction to game theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Scodel, R., & Skinner, M. B. (2004). Publishing the scholarly article in classical studies: A guide for new members of the profession. The Society for Classical Studies; University of Pennsylvania. http://apaclassics.org/publications-and-research/publishing-scholarly-article-classical-studies.
17. Van den Steen, Eric J. (2005). Organizational beliefs and managerial vision. Journal of Law, Economics & Organization, 21(1), 256–283.