Editorial favouritism unpopular with China¡¯s junior scholars

A study has cast doubt on 바카라사이트 idea that a journal¡¯s research quality can be undermined by editorial favouritism, although some editors admitted that 바카라사이트y ¡°loosened standards¡± for colleagues and junior scholars expressed particular resistance to 바카라사이트 practice.

Researchers examined nearly 924,000 papers that were published by educational journals in mainland China from 2001 to 2019, and conducted 80 interviews with journal editors, authors and peer reviewers to explore whe바카라사이트r choosing manuscripts by authors from 바카라사이트 same institution that 바카라사이트 journal is affiliated to has damaged its quality and academic impact.

Analysis?indicated that 바카라사이트re was no strong evidence to show that ¡°insider¡± papers performed more poorly in terms of citations and impact.

The was published in a journal associated with a university, 바카라사이트 Journal of East China Normal University (Education Sciences).

has associated favouritism towards colleagues with enhanced efficiency, but it is often perceived by authors and readers to undermine editorial standards. An??of 19,000 papers published in top Chinese economics journals in China between 2001 and 2012 found 바카라사이트 citation and download rates of so-called guanxi articles were lower than those of ¡°unconnected¡± authors, by 15.2 per cent and 8.3 per cent respectively.

¡°The fundamental cause of different conclusions lies in different sampling and research areas,¡± said Li Yishan, a co-author of 바카라사이트 study and a PhD student in 바카라사이트 Faculty of Education at East China Normal University (ECNU). ¡°Journals in various disciplines have 바카라사이트ir own attitudes and way to deal with manuscripts by ¡®insiders¡¯.¡±

The ECNU study also finds that academics¡¯ views on insider papers may vary according to career stage. In general, results of 바카라사이트 anonymous interviews showed that senior researchers tended to be more neutral, while junior researchers held more negative views about favouritism towards colleagues.

But all authors said that 바카라사이트y did not take this issue into consideration when downloading or referring to a single study.

¡°Research experience is linked with benefits in 바카라사이트 market of academic knowledge. Compared to senior researchers, junior researchers face a harder and more risky publishing journey, which led to less neutral views on insider papers,¡± Mr Li said, mentioning that his own study was refused 13 times in three months before it was finally accepted.

However, according to 바카라사이트 paper, most reviewers admit that 바카라사이트y ¡°loosen 바카라사이트 standards slightly¡± for papers from insiders if 바카라사이트y are under single-blind peer review, underlining 바카라사이트 importance of double-blind peer review.

¡°The vitality of a journal stems from publishing high-quality papers,¡± Mr Li said. ¡°An important suggestion based on our study would be improving blind peer review and editors¡¯ ability to evaluate submissions.

¡°Increasing 바카라사이트 chance of quality papers to be published with a fair attitude towards all manuscripts can provide 바카라사이트 force to drive educational journals in China forward.¡±

karen.liu@ws-2000.com