New paper on peer review

[Bornmann Lutz]

Dear colleague:

 

You might be interested in our new OA paper:

 

Bornmann, L. & Daniel, H.-D. (2009). The luck of the referee draw: would
it make a difference if a journal editor exchanged one review for
another? Learned Publishing, 22(2), 117-125.

 

Abstract: In journal peer review, editorial decisions on submitted
manuscripts are informed by referees' expert recommendations; however,
the choice of referees may affect these decisions. Using data from
Angewandte Chemie International Edition (AC-IE), this study tested what
would have happened if referee reports had been received

in a different order. In AC-IE's peer-review process, a manuscript is
generally published only if two referees rate the results of the study
as important and also recommend publication in the journal (what we have
called the 'clear-cut' rule). For 23% of those manuscripts for which a
third referee report arrived after the editorial decision was made (37
of 162), this rule would have led to a different decision if the third
report had replaced either of the others.

 

Please find the paper attached. 

 

Kind regards,

Lutz Bornmann

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------

Dr. Lutz Bornmann

ETH Zurich, D-GESS

Professorship for Social Psychology and Research on Higher Education

Zaehringerstr. 24 / ZAE

CH-8092 Zurich

Phone: 0041 44 632 48 25

Fax: 0041 44 632 12 83

Skype: lutz.bornmann

http://www.psh.ethz.ch/ 

bornmann at gess.ethz.ch

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20090226/db0a1968/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lpub22_2_117-125.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 124137 bytes
Desc: lpub22_2_117-125.pdf
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20090226/db0a1968/attachment.pdf>