Critiquing the Peer Review Process: Examining a Potential Dual-Role Conflict
Examined the frequency with which editors and associate editors published in their own journals. 136 editors or associate editors of psychology journals were surveyed. 61.6% had published at least 1 article in their journal since their appointment as editor or associate editor. Of those who did so, 41% of the editors and 20.5% of the associate editors reported that they may have been aided by their positions. The majority of Ss felt that it was appropriate to publish in their own journals. It is suggested that an established set of guidelines regarding peer review and manuscript submission might benefit all those involved in the publication process.
Houlihan, D., Hofschulte, L., Sachau, D., & Patten, C. (1992). Critiquing the Peer Review Process: Examining a Potential Dual Role Conflict. American Psychologist, 47(12), 1679-1681. doi. 10.1037/0003-066X.47.12.1679
Publisher's Copyright and Source
Copyright © 1992 American Psychological Association. Article published by the American Psychological Association in American Psychologist, volume 47, issue number 12, December 1992, pages 1679-1681. Available online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.47.12.1679