Is there bias in editorial choice? Yes

Scientometrics

Volumn 105, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 2249-2251

  Moustafa, Khaled ^a  

^a Bioinformatique et Chimie Moléculaire   (France)

Author keywords

Blind peer review; Editorial bias; Fame bias; Manuscript submission; Peer review; Peer review bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 84947128138     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: 15882861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1617-3     Document Type: Letter

References (12)

1. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2009). The state of h index research. Is the h index the ideal way to measure research performance? EMBO Reports,10(1), 2–6.
2. Darling, E. S. (2015). Use of double-blind peer review to increase author diversity. Conservation Biology,29(1), 297–299.
3. Eaton, K., & Anthony, H. (2000). Bias in peer review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine,93(6), 338.
4. Grace, M. (2004). The role of the scientific editor. British Dental Journal,197(12), 725–734.
5. http://www.nature.com/nature/authors/get_published. Accessed April, 25 2015.
6. Lush, B. (2006). Peer review. Unreliable reviewers. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine,99(8), 385.
7. Mahian, O. (2015). Corresponding authors: Is there fame bias in editorial choice? Nature,519(7544), 414.
8. Manchikanti, L., Kaye, A. D., Boswell, M. V., & Hirsch, J. A. (2015). Medical journal peer review: Process and bias. Pain Physician,18(1), E1–E14.
9. Onitilo, A. A., Engel, J. M., Salzman-Scott, S. A., Stankowski, R. V., & Doi, S. A. (2013). Reliability of reviewer ratings in the manuscript peer review process: An opportunity for improvement. Accountability in Research,20(4), 270–284.
10. Phillips, J. S. (2011). Expert bias in peer review. Current Medical Research and Opinion,27(12), 2229–2233.
11. Smith, R. (2006). Peer review: A flawed process at the heart of science and journals. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine,99(4), 178–182.
12. Spier, R. E. (2002). Peer review and innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics,8(1), 99–108.