Ethics in Peer Review of Academic Journal Articles as Perceived by Authors in the Educational Sciences

Journal of Academic Ethics 16 (4):359-376 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This research examined the experiences of authors of academic journal articles in the educational sector of all eight universities in Finland. The ethical principles of peer review and best and worst review processes were in focus. Data were gathered by electronic questionnaire, which was completed by 121 respondents who represented well the heterogeneity of the staff in the educational sector. Out of nine ethical principles honesty, constructiveness, and impartiality were appreciated but promptness, balance, and diplomacy were criticized. According to two open questions, a third of authors praised and blamed reviewers as experts and non-experts. The accuracy of feedback was more often present in the best rather than in the worst experienced review processes. Journals’ editors and their decision-making called forth more negative than positive accounts. The results were discussed in the context of ethical codes for reviewers and researchers’ findings regarding the ethical responsibilities to promote good science with thorough, appropriate, and honest feedback and feedforward.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,672

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Ethical issues in journal Peer-review.J. Angelo Corlett - 2005 - Journal of Academic Ethics 2 (4):355-366.
Ethics of field research: Do journals set the standard?Helene Marsh & Carole M. Eros - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (3):375-382.
Advances in peer review research: an introduction.Arthur E. Stamps Iii - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):3-10.
Using a dialectical scientific brief in peer review.Arthur Stamps - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):85-98.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-06-15

Downloads
16 (#902,419)

6 months
6 (#509,130)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Background.[author unknown] - 2004 - The Chesterton Review 30 (3-4):411-413.
Pernicious publication practices.James V. Bradley - 1981 - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 18 (1):31-34.
The ethics of peer review in bioethics.David Wendler & Franklin Miller - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (10):697-701.

View all 13 references / Add more references