%0 Report %1 Hensley %A Hensley, Susan E. %A Nelson, Carnot E. %D 1980 %K Zeitschrift evaluation peer_review %T The Reviewing Processes in Social Science Publications: A Review of Research. ERIC/TM Report 77 %X Because of the increase in the number of manuscripts submitted to journals, editors and publishers must either publish more manuscripts or increase the proportion of manuscripts rejected. Rejection decisions are usually informed by informal peer evaluation, editorial processes, and/or citation analysis. Unfortunately, no standard criteria for evaluation have been developed, and inter-referee agreement on the attributes of journal articles is generally low. The research on these issues is reviewed.

@techreport{Hensley, abstract = {Because of the increase in the number of manuscripts submitted to journals, editors and publishers must either publish more manuscripts or increase the proportion of manuscripts rejected. Rejection decisions are usually informed by informal peer evaluation, editorial processes, and/or citation analysis. Unfortunately, no standard criteria for evaluation have been developed, and inter-referee agreement on the attributes of journal articles is generally low. The research on these issues is reviewed. }, added-at = {2007-10-09T10:21:58.000+0200}, author = {Hensley, Susan E. and Nelson, Carnot E.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/213eba69504b5bee59eb1aacabcff5d5e/wdees}, institution = {ERIC Clearinghouse on Tests, Measurement, and Evaluation, Princeton, NJ.}, interhash = {d7dcad132ef0fb002e05100c06427265}, intrahash = {13eba69504b5bee59eb1aacabcff5d5e}, keywords = {Zeitschrift evaluation peer_review}, timestamp = {2007-10-09T10:21:58.000+0200}, title = {The Reviewing Processes in Social Science Publications: A Review of Research. ERIC/TM Report 77}, year = 1980 }