Abstract
The study aimed to determine the perceptions and views of Iranian editors about the quality of journals, articles, the responsibilities of the editorial team, review and the review process, copyright and intellectual property, consequences of open access (OA), and influential factors in the scientific life cycle of a journal. The study adopted a qualitative approach using interviews. Respondents included 13 editors of journals. Purposive and snowball sampling methods were used for the interview. The results showed that the editor’s main tasks were to supervise the reviewers’ performance, initially control the article, and send it to the reviewers. Participants believed that compliance with professional standards was the main factor influencing the scientific quality of publications. Their understanding of the ethical codes includes impartiality and confidentiality in evaluation and publication. In light of the fact that reviewers often perform superficial reviews, the editors viewed them as poor-quality. They stated that intellectual property is not valued and observed in many cases. Some participants mentioned the negative consequences of open access (OA). However, they think OA bears more positive than adverse outcomes. Observance of these factors is ultimately essential for the survival of a scientific journal.
Funding source: Regional Information Center for Science and Technology (RICeST)
Award Identifier / Grant number: 99.D.1834
References
Abbaspour, J., M. Mirzabeigi, and M. A. Zeinali. 2016. “An Assessment of Iranian Journals Guide for Authors.” Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management 31 (3): 631–49. https://jipm.irandoc.ac.ir/article_699355_db94eef1c1148a9e4442e739981cfd4d.pdf (accessed May 20, 2021) [in Persian].Search in Google Scholar
Adamson, J., and T. Muller. 2008. “Evolving Academic Journal Editorial Systems.” English Language Teacher Education and Development (ELTED) 11: 45–51. http://www.elted.net/uploads/7/3/1/6/7316005/v11_7adamson-muller.pdf (accessed May 20, 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Adamson, J., and T. Muller. 2012. “Editorial Investigation of Roles and Responsibilities in Academic Journal Editorial Systems.” In Editorial and Authorial Voices in EFL Academic Journal Publishing, edited by J. L. Adamson, and R. C. Nunn, 83–112. Busan: Asian EFL Journal Press.Search in Google Scholar
Alzahrani, S. 2010. “The Role of Editorial Boards of Scholarly Journals on the Green and the Gold Road to Open Access.” Doctoral diss., University of British Columbia.Search in Google Scholar
Atrak, H. 2018. “Ethics in Research: The Nature of Self-Plagiarism.” Ethics in Science and Technology 13 (2): 1–8. https://ethicsjournal.ir/article-1-1098-en.html (accessed May 20, 2021) [in Persian].Search in Google Scholar
Attride-Stirling, J. 2001. “Thematic Networks: An Analytic Tool for Qualitative Research.” Qualitative Research 1 (3): 385–405. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F146879410100100307.10.1177/146879410100100307Search in Google Scholar
Beck, S., M. Mahdad, K. Beukel, and M. Poetz. 2019. “The Value of Scientific Knowledge Dissemination for Scientists-A Value Capture Perspective.” Publications 7 (3): 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7030054.Search in Google Scholar
Besancenot, D., K. V. Huynh, and J. R. Faria. 2012. “Search and Research: The Influence of Editorial Boards on Journals’ Quality.” Theory and Decision 73 (4): 687–702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-012-9314-7.Search in Google Scholar
Bhat, A. n.d. Snowball Sampling: Methods, Pros & Cons. USA: QuestionPro. Also available at https://www.questionpro.com/blog/snowball-sampling/.Search in Google Scholar
Bowyer, K. W. 2012. Mentoring Advice on “Conferences Versus Journals” for CSE Faculty. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.Search in Google Scholar
Braga, G. M., and C. A. Oberhofer. 1981. “A Model for Evaluating Scientific and Technical Journals from Developing Countries.” In Proceedings of the ASIS Annual Meeting, 18, 51–4. Washington: Knowledge Industry Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.Search in Google Scholar
Brown, C. 2010. “Communication in the Sciences.” Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 44 (1): 285–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2010.1440440114.Search in Google Scholar
Charbonneau, D. H., and M. Priehs. 2014. “Copyright Awareness, Partnerships, and Training Issues in Academic Libraries.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (3–4): 228–33.10.1016/j.acalib.2014.03.009Search in Google Scholar
Chew, M., E. V. Villanueva, and M. B. Van Der Weyden. 2007. “Life and Times of the Impact Factor: Retrospective Analysis of Trends for Seven Medical Journals (1994–2005) and Their Editors’ Views.” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 100 (3): 142–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680710000313.Search in Google Scholar
Corbett, A., J. Cornelissen, A. Delios, and B. Harley. 2014. “Variety, Novelty, and Perceptions of Scholarship in Research on Management and Organizations: An Appeal for Ambidextrous Scholarship.” Journal of Management Studies 51 (1): 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12032.Search in Google Scholar
Corley, K. G., and B. S. Schinoff. 2017. “Who, Me? An Inductive Study of Novice Experts in the Context of How Editors Come to Understand Theoretical Contribution.” Academy of Management Perspectives 31 (1): 4–27. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2015.0131.Search in Google Scholar
Crosier, K. 2004. “How Effectively Do Marketing Journals Transfer Useful Learning from Scholars to Practitioners?” Marketing Intelligence and Planning 22 (5): 540–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500410551923.Search in Google Scholar
Daraio, C., and A. Vaccari. 2020. “Using Normative Ethics for Building a Good Evaluation of Research Practices: Towards the Assessment of Researcher’s Virtues.” Scientometrics 125 (2): 1053–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03658-4.Search in Google Scholar
Denzin, N., and Y. Lincoln. 1994. “Introduction: Entering the Field of Qualitative Research.” In Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by N. K. Denzin, and Y. S. Lincoln, 1–17. California: Sage Publication, Inc.Search in Google Scholar
Fakhari, H., and H. Rajabdorri. 2018. “A Survey on the Ethical Approach of Chief Editors and Members of the Editorial Board of Scientific and Research Journal of Accounting in the Publication of the Article in the Own Magazine.” Journal of Financial Accounting Knowledge 5 (1): 1–24 [in Persian]. https://doi.org/10.30479/jfak.2018.1397.Search in Google Scholar
Franke, R. H., T. W. Edlund, and F. OsterIII. 1990. “The Development of Strategic Management: Journal Quality and Article Impact.” Strategic Management Journal 11 (3): 243–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250110306.Search in Google Scholar
Frijters, P., and B. Torgler. 2019. “Improving the Peer Review Process: A Proposed Market System.” Scientometrics 119 (2): 1285–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03076-1.Search in Google Scholar
Garcia, J. A., R. Rodriguez-Sánchez, and J. Fdez-Valdivia. 2021. “The Interplay Between the Reviewer’s Incentives and the Journal’s Quality Standard.” Scientometrics 126: 3041–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03839-1.Search in Google Scholar
Ghane, M. R. 2016. “Structural Assessment of Iranian Scholarly Journals.” Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science 21 (1): 69–81. https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol21no1.5.Search in Google Scholar
Ghasemi, H., N. Rasekh, and N. Jabari. 2020. “Identifying Challenges of Sport Management Paper Acceptance in Internationally Recognized Journals (With an Emphasis on Web of Science and Scopus).” Journal of Sport Management 12 (2): 385–405 [in Persian]. https://doi.org/10.22059/jsm.2019.249543.2001.Search in Google Scholar
Giménez-Toledo, E., A. Román-Román, P. Perdiguero, and I. Palenci. 2009. “The Editorial Boards of Spanish Scholarly Journals: What are They Like? What Should They be Like?” Journal of Scholarly Publishing 40 (3): 287–306. https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.40.3.287.Search in Google Scholar
Glonti, K., I. Boutron, D. Moher, and D. Hren. 2020. “Journal Editors’ Perspectives on the Communication Practices in Biomedical Journals: A Qualitative Study.” BMJ Open 10 (8): e035600. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035600.Search in Google Scholar
Goyanes, M., and L. De Marcos. 2020. “Academic Influence and Invisible Colleges Through Editorial Board Interlocking in Communication Sciences: A Social Network Analysis of Leading Journals.” Scientometrics 123 (2): 791–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03401-z.Search in Google Scholar
Graf, C., E. Wager, A. Bowman, S. Fiack, D. Scott-Lichter, and A. Robinson. 2007. “Best Practice Guidelines on Publication Ethics: A Publisher’s Perspective.” International Journal of Clinical Practice 61: 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2006.01230.x.Search in Google Scholar
Grimaldo, F., M. Paolucci, and J. Sabater-Mir. 2018. “Reputation or Peer Review? The Role of Outliers.” Scientometrics 116 (3): 1421–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2826-3.Search in Google Scholar
Jawaid, S. A., and M. Jawaid. 2017. “Professional Competencies Required for Editors of Biomedical Journals.” Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences 33 (5): 1050–2. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.335.13967.Search in Google Scholar
Kravitz, R. L., and M. D. Feldman. 2011. “From the Editors’ Desk: Self-Plagiarism and Other Editorial Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 26 (1): 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1562-z.Search in Google Scholar
Laband, D. N. 1990. “Is There Value-Added from the Review Process in Economics? Preliminary Evidence from Authors.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 105 (2): 341–52. https://doi.org/10.2307/2937790.Search in Google Scholar
Laband, D. N., and M. J. Piette. 1994. “Favoritism Versus Search for Good Papers: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Behavior of Journal Editors.” Journal of Political Economy 102 (1): 194–203. https://doi.org/10.1086/261927.Search in Google Scholar
Lee, C. J., C. R. Sugimoto, G. Zhang, and B. Cronin. 2013. “Bias in Peer Review.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (1): 2–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22784.Search in Google Scholar
Lindsey, D. 1976. “Distinction, Achievement, and Editorial Board Membership.” American Psychologist 31 (11): 799–804. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.31.11.799.Search in Google Scholar
Macdonald, S., and J. Kam. 2007. “Ring a Ring o’Roses: Quality Journals and Gamesmanship in Management Studies.” Journal of Management Studies 44 (4): 640–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00704.x.Search in Google Scholar
Mazov, N. A., and V. N. Gureev. 2016. “The Editorial Boards of Scientific Journals as a Subject of Scientometric Research: A Literature Review.” Scientific and Technical Information Processing 43 (3): 144–53. https://doi.org/10.3103/S0147688216030035.Search in Google Scholar
McKelvey, M., and B. Rake. 2020. “Exploring Scientific Publications by Firms: What are the Roles of Academic and Corporate Partners for Publications in High Reputation or High Impact Journals?” Scientometrics 122 (3): 1323–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03344-5.Search in Google Scholar
Mendonça, S., J. Pereira, and M. E. Ferreira. 2018. “Gatekeeping African Studies: What Does “Editormetrics” Indicate About Journal Governance?” Scientometrics 117 (3): 1513–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2909-1.Search in Google Scholar
Moher, D., J. Galipeau, S. Alam, V. Barbour, K. Bartolomeos, P. Baskin, and G. Zhaori. 2017. “Core Competencies for Scientific Editors of Biomedical Journals: Consensus Statement.” BMC Medicine 15 (1): 167. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0927-0.Search in Google Scholar
Nisonger, T. E. 1998. Management of Serials in Libraries. Libraries Unlimited. Colorado: Englewood, Inc.Search in Google Scholar
Nunn, R., and J. Adamson. 2007. “Towards the Development of International Criteria for Journal Paper Evaluation.” Asian EFL Journal 9 (4): 205–28. http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Dec_2007_rn&ja.php (accessed May 20, 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Orton, C. G. 2009. “Concerns of Editors and Publishers: Plagiarism, Rights of Authors, Open Access, Etc.” In World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, September 7–12, 2009, Munich, Germany. IFMBE Proceedings, Vol. 25/13, edited by O. Dössel, and W. C. Schlegel. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-03895-2_2Search in Google Scholar
Pagel, P. S., and J. A. Hudetz. 2011. “Bibliometric Analysis of Anaesthesia Journal Editorial Board Members: Correlation Between Journal Impact Factor and the Median H-Index of its Board Members.” British Journal of Anaesthesia 107 (3): 357–61. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aer191.Search in Google Scholar
Petersen, J., F. Hattke, and R. Vogel. 2017. “Editorial Governance and Journal Impact: A Study of Management and Business Journals.” Scientometrics 112 (3): 1593–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2434-7.Search in Google Scholar
Rahimi, F., C. F. Alinejad, J. M. Kohandel, and L. S. Mirhaghjoo. 2016. “Ethical Approach of Editors-in-Chief and Their Share of Publishing Articles in Their Own Journals.” Ethics in Science and Technology 11 (1): 51–61 [in Persian].Search in Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Sánchez, R., J. A. García, and J. Fdez-Valdivia. 2018. “Editorial Decisions with Informed and Uninformed Reviewers.” Scientometrics 117 (1): 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2875-7.Search in Google Scholar
Rosenoer, J. 1997. “Copyright.” In CyberLaw, n.p. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4612-4064-8Search in Google Scholar
Rowlands, I., D. Nicholas, and P. Huntington. 2004. “Scholarly Communication in the Digital Environment: What do Authors Want?” Learned Publishing 17 (4): 261–73. https://doi.org/10.1087/0953151042321680.Search in Google Scholar
Schneider, F., A. Kläy, A. B. Zimmermann, T. Buser, M. Ingalls, and P. Messerli. 2019. “How Can Science Support the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development? Four Tasks to Tackle the Normative Dimension of Sustainability.” Sustainability Science 14 (6): 1593–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00675-y.Search in Google Scholar
Stigler, G. J., S. M. Stigler, and C. Friedland. 1995. “The Journals of Economics.” Journal of Political Economy 103 (2): 331–59. https://doi.org/10.1086/261986.Search in Google Scholar
Strauss, A. L., and J. M. Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Sun, H., and J. D. Linton. 2004. “Structuring Papers for Success: Making Your Paper More Like a High Impact Publication than a Desk Reject.” Technovation 34 (10): 571–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2014.07.008.Search in Google Scholar
Teixeira da Silva, J. A. 2021. “Conflicts of Interest Arising from Simultaneous Service by Editors of Competing Journals or Publishers.” Publications 9 (6): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010006.Search in Google Scholar
Teixeira, E. K., and M. Oliveira. 2018. “Editorial Board Interlocking in Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital Research Field.” Scientometrics 117 (3): 1853–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2937-x.Search in Google Scholar
Thompson, P. J. 2009. “How to Choose the Right Journal for Your Manuscript?” Chest 132 (3): 1073–6. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.07-1340.Search in Google Scholar
Ule, J. 2020. “Open Access, Open Data and Peer Review.” Genome Biology 21 (1): 86. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-020-02005-3.Search in Google Scholar
Utiger, R. D. 2001. Syllabus for Prospective and Newly Appointed Editors: Prepared by the WAME Education Committee, World Association of Medical Editors: India http://wame.org/syllabus-for-prospective-and-newly-appointed-editors (accessed May 2, 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Vara, N. 2021. “Examining the Status and Qualitative Evaluation of MSRT Journals Based on Regulations on Determining the Credibility.” Rahyaft 30 (80): 115–29 [in Persian]. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.10272690.1399.30.80.8.7.10.1097/01.QMH.0000731464.40137.1bSearch in Google Scholar
Willett, P. 2013. “The Characteristics of Journal Editorial Boards in Library and Information Science.” International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology 3 (1): 5–17. https://doi.org/10.5865/IJKCT.2013.3.1.005.Search in Google Scholar
Wu, D., J. Li, X. Lu, and J. Li. 2018. “Journal Editorship Index for Assessing the Scholarly Impact of Academic Institutions: An Empirical Analysis in the Field of Economics.” Journal of Informetrics 12 (2): 448–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.008.Search in Google Scholar
Wu, D., X. Lu, J. Li, and J. Li. 2020. “Does the Institutional Diversity of Editorial Boards Increase Journal Quality? The Case Economics Field.” Scientometrics 124 (2): 1579–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03505-6.Search in Google Scholar
Youk, S., and H. S. Park. 2019. “Where and What do They Publish? Editors’ and Editorial Board Members’ Affiliated Institutions and the Citation Counts of Their Endogenous Publications in the Field of Communication.” Scientometrics 120 (3): 1237–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03169-x.Search in Google Scholar
Zdeněk, R. 2018. “Editorial Board Self-Publishing Rates in Czech Economic Journals.” Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (2): 669–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9922-2.Search in Google Scholar
Zsindely, S., A. Schubert, and T. Braun. 1982. “Editorial Gatekeeping Patterns in International Science Journals: A New Science Indicator.” Scientometrics 4 (1): 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02098006.Search in Google Scholar
Zuccala, A. 2006. “Modeling the Invisible College.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 (2): 152–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20256.Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- School Library Service for Pre-Kindergarten Students: An Analysis of Certification and Standards
- Issues and Perspectives of Public Libraries in Pakistan: A Review
- Editors’ Perceptions and Views on Journal Quality: The Case of Iran’s Editors-in-Chief
- Proposal of a Qualitative Content Analysis Process for a Solo Researcher
- Assessing University Students’ Satisfaction with Web-Based Library Services Based on SERVQUAL Model: A Case of a Pakistani University
- The Application of Open Science Potentials in Research Processes: A Comprehensive Literature Review
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- School Library Service for Pre-Kindergarten Students: An Analysis of Certification and Standards
- Issues and Perspectives of Public Libraries in Pakistan: A Review
- Editors’ Perceptions and Views on Journal Quality: The Case of Iran’s Editors-in-Chief
- Proposal of a Qualitative Content Analysis Process for a Solo Researcher
- Assessing University Students’ Satisfaction with Web-Based Library Services Based on SERVQUAL Model: A Case of a Pakistani University
- The Application of Open Science Potentials in Research Processes: A Comprehensive Literature Review