[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: How many (peer reveiwed) journals are there?
- To: "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: How many (peer reveiwed) journals are there?
- From: "Pikas, Christina K." <Christina.Pikas@jhuapl.edu>
- Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 18:31:07 EST
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
I doubt that there can or should be some objective or outside standard for peer-review. It is up to the interested parties for each journal to work the boundary and demarcation problems as well as to manage space, time, and money. Transparency in the process is certainly good, but some sort of outside standard won't address the most common complaints about peer review (conservative bias, gender issues, bad behavior of interested reviewers, too little information, too slow, too expensive). Weller's book on peer review is good, too,  and there's a Cochrane report . Of course tons on this subject in the biomed journals including meta-analyses and reviews. BTW - monographic series also have ISSNs so an ISSN isn't sufficient for a definition. Christina  Weller, A. C. (2001). Editorial peer review : Its strengths and weaknesses. Medford, N.J.: Information Today  Jefferson, T., Rudin, M., Brodney Folse, S., & Davidoff, F. (2007). Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Chichester, UK: Wiley. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000016.pub3 -----Original Message----- From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Sally Morris (Morris Associates) Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 9:10 PM To: email@example.com Subject: RE: How many (peer reveiwed) journals are there? I agree with Robert Richards: the trouble with Ulrich's is that it's publisher-completed Some (especially in non-English speaking countries) don't know of its existence Some don't update their entries And it's entirely dependent on the judgement of the person completing the entry as to how they categorise the journal; there is no definition of 'peer-reviewed', and there are no checks. Many journals (including the one I edit - and major 'hybrid' journals such as BMJ, for that matter) have peer review for some content (e.g. research articles) but not for other less scholarly items. But as Robert says, there is no 'standard' for peer review anyway; Irene Hames' book on the subject is probably the closest; perhaps this is something on which the publishing industry and the scholarly and library communities could usefully work together? Sally Morris Consultant, Morris Associates (Publishing Consultancy) Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK Email: firstname.lastname@example.org