Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/27879
Appears in Collections:Biological and Environmental Sciences Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: The effectiveness of journals as arbiters of scientific impact
Author(s): Paine, C E Timothy
Fox, Charles W
Keywords: Authorship
citations
manuscript
peer review
publishing
rejection
Issue Date: 31-Oct-2018
Citation: Paine CET & Fox CW (2018) The effectiveness of journals as arbiters of scientific impact. Ecology and Evolution, 8 (19), pp. 9566-9585. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4467.
Abstract: Academic publishers purport to be arbiters of knowledge, aiming to publish studies that advance the frontiers of their research domain. Yet the effectiveness of journal editors at identifying novel and important research is generally unknown, in part because of the confidential nature of the editorial and peer review process. Using questionnaires, we evaluated the degree to which journals are effective arbiters of scientific impact on the domain of Ecology, quantified by three key criteria. First, journals discriminated against low‐impact manuscripts: The probability of rejection increased as the number of citations gained by the published paper decreased. Second, journals were more likely to publish high‐impact manuscripts (those that obtained citations in 90th percentile for their journal) than run‐of‐the‐mill manuscripts; editors were only 23% and 41% as likely to reject an eventual high‐impact paper (pre‐ versus postreview rejection) compared to a run‐of‐the‐mill paper. Third, editors did occasionally reject papers that went on to be highly cited. Error rates were low, however: Only 3.8% of rejected papers gained more citations than the median article in the journal that rejected them, and only 9.2% of rejected manuscripts went on to be high‐impact papers in the (generally lower impact factor) publishing journal. The effectiveness of scientific arbitration increased with journal prominence, although some highly prominent journals were no more effective than much less prominent ones. We conclude that the academic publishing system, founded on peer review, appropriately recognizes the significance of research contained in manuscripts, as measured by the number of citations that manuscripts obtain after publication, even though some errors are made. We therefore recommend that authors reduce publication delays by choosing journals appropriate to the significance of their research.
DOI Link: 10.1002/ece3.4467
Rights: © 2018 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Paine_et_al-2018-Ecology_and_Evolution.pdfFulltext - Published Version1.5 MBAdobe PDFView/Open



This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.