Peer review ethics in Iranian LIS scholarly journals: a comparison between views of reviewers and authors
Peer review is one of the most efficient ways to ensure the quality of papers for possible publication in scholarly journals. However, the process of peer review is not free of bias and disorders. Many reviewers are unaware of how their attitudes towards the evaluation of scholarly papers may viola...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Firenze University Press
2022-12-01
|
| Series: | JLIS.it |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.jlis.it/index.php/jlis/article/view/504 |
| _version_ | 1797952276651835392 |
|---|---|
| author | Rahmatollah Fattahi Reza Rajabali Beglou Somayeh Sadat Akhshik |
| author_facet | Rahmatollah Fattahi Reza Rajabali Beglou Somayeh Sadat Akhshik |
| author_sort | Rahmatollah Fattahi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
Peer review is one of the most efficient ways to ensure the quality of papers for possible publication in scholarly journals. However, the process of peer review is not free of bias and disorders. Many reviewers are unaware of how their attitudes towards the evaluation of scholarly papers may violate Peer Review Ethics (PRE). This paper attempts to analyze the different ethical issues influencing the job of reviewing. The research sample for this study included 7 Iranian library and information journals, 124 Iranian peer reviewers, and 34 authors. Peer reviewers and authors were asked to evaluate the most important ethical elements of peer review in Iranian LIS journals through two different questionnaires based on Rajabali Beglou et al. (2019) research.
Findings showed that there was no difference among authors and reviewers in terms of gender in most PRE elements. Also, the level of experience of the authors was not significant in terms of understanding and acceptance of the PRE among reviewers and authors. However, review experiences regarding some PRE elements were significant in respondents’ viewpoints. The experiences reviewers had already gained were influential on their views about PRE. In addition, results showed that there were significant differences among reviewers and authors about the PRE elements in LIS journals. Authorship experiences had not effect on the PRE elements and the dual role of peer reviewing and authorship had no impact on their views.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T22:43:45Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4af7e30c708541a8897600bf4c730e24 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2038-1026 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T22:43:45Z |
| publishDate | 2022-12-01 |
| publisher | Firenze University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | JLIS.it |
| spelling | doaj.art-4af7e30c708541a8897600bf4c730e242023-01-15T14:06:35ZengFirenze University PressJLIS.it2038-10262022-12-0114110.36253/jlis.it-504Peer review ethics in Iranian LIS scholarly journals: a comparison between views of reviewers and authorsRahmatollah Fattahi0Reza Rajabali Beglou1Somayeh Sadat Akhshik2Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Iranian Research Institute for Information Science and Technology (Irandoc)Kharazmi Unversity Peer review is one of the most efficient ways to ensure the quality of papers for possible publication in scholarly journals. However, the process of peer review is not free of bias and disorders. Many reviewers are unaware of how their attitudes towards the evaluation of scholarly papers may violate Peer Review Ethics (PRE). This paper attempts to analyze the different ethical issues influencing the job of reviewing. The research sample for this study included 7 Iranian library and information journals, 124 Iranian peer reviewers, and 34 authors. Peer reviewers and authors were asked to evaluate the most important ethical elements of peer review in Iranian LIS journals through two different questionnaires based on Rajabali Beglou et al. (2019) research. Findings showed that there was no difference among authors and reviewers in terms of gender in most PRE elements. Also, the level of experience of the authors was not significant in terms of understanding and acceptance of the PRE among reviewers and authors. However, review experiences regarding some PRE elements were significant in respondents’ viewpoints. The experiences reviewers had already gained were influential on their views about PRE. In addition, results showed that there were significant differences among reviewers and authors about the PRE elements in LIS journals. Authorship experiences had not effect on the PRE elements and the dual role of peer reviewing and authorship had no impact on their views. https://www.jlis.it/index.php/jlis/article/view/504Peer Review; Peer Review Ethics (PRE);Scholarly Journals;Ethical Issues;Iran. |
| spellingShingle | Rahmatollah Fattahi Reza Rajabali Beglou Somayeh Sadat Akhshik Peer review ethics in Iranian LIS scholarly journals: a comparison between views of reviewers and authors JLIS.it Peer Review; Peer Review Ethics (PRE); Scholarly Journals; Ethical Issues; Iran. |
| title | Peer review ethics in Iranian LIS scholarly journals: a comparison between views of reviewers and authors |
| title_full | Peer review ethics in Iranian LIS scholarly journals: a comparison between views of reviewers and authors |
| title_fullStr | Peer review ethics in Iranian LIS scholarly journals: a comparison between views of reviewers and authors |
| title_full_unstemmed | Peer review ethics in Iranian LIS scholarly journals: a comparison between views of reviewers and authors |
| title_short | Peer review ethics in Iranian LIS scholarly journals: a comparison between views of reviewers and authors |
| title_sort | peer review ethics in iranian lis scholarly journals a comparison between views of reviewers and authors |
| topic | Peer Review; Peer Review Ethics (PRE); Scholarly Journals; Ethical Issues; Iran. |
| url | https://www.jlis.it/index.php/jlis/article/view/504 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rahmatollahfattahi peerreviewethicsiniranianlisscholarlyjournalsacomparisonbetweenviewsofreviewersandauthors AT rezarajabalibeglou peerreviewethicsiniranianlisscholarlyjournalsacomparisonbetweenviewsofreviewersandauthors AT somayehsadatakhshik peerreviewethicsiniranianlisscholarlyjournalsacomparisonbetweenviewsofreviewersandauthors |