Peer Reviewing for Academic Journals: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Practically no historical accounts of the evolution of peer review exist. Biomedical journals appeared in the 19th century as personal organs, following the model of more general journalism.<ref name="burnham">Burnham, J.C. (1990). The evolution of editorial peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1323–1329.[abstract]</ref> Peer review originated with the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1732 and subsequently was adopted by the Royal Society of London in 1752.<ref name="suls">Suls J, Martin R. The air we breathe: A critical look at practices and alternatives in the peer-review process. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2009, 4:40–50.</ref> Several factors contributed to the widespread adoption of peer review across the physical, biomedical, and behavioral sciences after World War II, including increased federal support for research, dramatic growth in the research community, increased specialization among researchers with a concomitant demand for reviewer expertise, and intense competition for journal page space. However, editorial practices appear to have changed piecemeal, with each editor and journal rediscovering the process anew.<ref name="suls" /> | Practically no historical accounts of the evolution of peer review exist. Biomedical journals appeared in the 19th century as personal organs, following the model of more general journalism.<ref name="burnham">Burnham, J.C. (1990). The evolution of editorial peer review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1323–1329.[abstract]</ref> Peer review originated with the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1732 and subsequently was adopted by the Royal Society of London in 1752.<ref name="suls">Suls J, Martin R. The air we breathe: A critical look at practices and alternatives in the peer-review process. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2009, 4:40–50.</ref> Several factors contributed to the widespread adoption of peer review across the physical, biomedical, and behavioral sciences after World War II, including increased federal support for research, dramatic growth in the research community, increased specialization among researchers with a concomitant demand for reviewer expertise, and intense competition for journal page space. However, editorial practices appear to have changed piecemeal, with each editor and journal rediscovering the process anew.<ref name="suls" /> | ||
== Process | [[Image:Peer_review_process.jpg|center]] | ||
== Process == | |||
== Role of a reviewer == | == Role of a reviewer == | ||
Revision as of 17:46, 25 January 2015
Introduction[edit | edit source]
With the increased surge in Journals and researches happening all over, it is very essential to ensure that the correct information is propagated. The Peer review forms an important aspect of today's research publication. Shortly, it is the screening of the submitted manuscript by two or more of the topic experts.
Background[edit | edit source]
Practically no historical accounts of the evolution of peer review exist. Biomedical journals appeared in the 19th century as personal organs, following the model of more general journalism.[1] Peer review originated with the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1732 and subsequently was adopted by the Royal Society of London in 1752.[2] Several factors contributed to the widespread adoption of peer review across the physical, biomedical, and behavioral sciences after World War II, including increased federal support for research, dramatic growth in the research community, increased specialization among researchers with a concomitant demand for reviewer expertise, and intense competition for journal page space. However, editorial practices appear to have changed piecemeal, with each editor and journal rediscovering the process anew.[2]
