Editorial practices and policies of scientific journals that make authors uncomfortable

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47909/ijsmc.1454

Keywords:

editorial practices, editorial policies, scientific journals, academic editorial process, academic editor, peer review

Abstract

Objective. The editorial practices and policies of scientific journals that were uncomfortable for authors were identified with the objective of eliciting feedback to enhance collaboration between authors and editors.

Methodology. The focus group technique was employed. Based on the content of the discussions, a descriptive analysis of the primary concepts was conducted, represented by word mapping and a treemap. Subsequently, the codes obtained were categorized into four dimensions: (1) editorial standards and formats, (2) selection and acceptance process, (3) peer review and evaluation, and (4) role of editors.

Results. The most frequently cited issues by the focus group participants were delays in the editorial process and a perceived lack of editorial transparency. Other challenges identified include the following: (1) a lack of clarity in standards, primarily due to the inconsistency in editorial requirements; (2) a lack of adequate feedback; (3) limitation in the number of authors; and (4) constraints in the number of publications.

Conclusions. A critical and reflective approach was employed to examine the editorial practices that affect scientific production. The necessity for reforms in the publishing system to enhance the quality, equity, and efficiency of the publication process was emphasized, with the aim of ensuring that scientific progress can significantly benefit global knowledge. Through a concerted and collaborative effort between authors, editors, and reviewers, it will be possible to pursue a trajectory of continuous improvement, wherein the advancement of high-quality scientific research will continue to be facilitated.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Amin, B., Osama, T., & Bakoush O. (2024). Deficient editorial practices, perceived quality, and expedient scholarly publishing in a developing nation. F1000Research, 12, 1173. http://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.134583.3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.134583.3

Ashford, S. J. (2013). Having scholarly impact: The art of hitting academic home runs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12(4), 623–633. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2013.0090 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2013.0090

Buss Thofehrn, M., López Montesinos, M. J., Rutz Porto, A., Coelho Amestoy, S., Oliveira Arrieira, I. C., & Mikla, M. (2013). Focus group: A data collection technique in qualitative research. Index de Enfermería, 22(1–2), 75–78. https://dx.doi.org/10.4321/S1132-12962013000100016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4321/S1132-12962013000100016

Candal-Pedreira, C., Rey-Brandariz, J., Varela-Lema, L., Pérez-Ríos, M., & Ruano-Ravina, A. (2023). The challenges of peer review: How to guarantee the quality and transparency of the editorial process of scientific journals. Anales de Pediatría, 99(1), 54–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpedi.2023.05.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpede.2023.05.006

Carcelén García, S., Durán-Vilches, M., & Galmes Cerezo, M. (2024). Territorios de la vulnerabilidad digital: Situaciones, emociones y actitudes de los jóvenes en el entorno online. Revista Española De Sociología, 33(1), a208. https://doi.org/10.22325/fes/res.2024.208 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22325/fes/res.2024.208

Colquitt, J. A., & George, G. (2011). Publishing in AMJ-part 1: Topic choice. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 432–435. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61965960 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61965960

Delgado-López-Cozar, E. & Ruiz-Pérez, R. (2009). La comunicación y edición científica fundamentos conceptuales. In UNSPECIFIED (Ed.), Homenaje a Isabel de Torres Ramírez: Estudios de documentación dedicados a su memoria (pp. 131–150). University of Granada.

Deroy Domínguez, D. (2022). Scientific journals and their role in the dissemination of scientific knowledge. Revista Cubana de Educación Superior, 41(Suppl. 1). http://scielo.sld.cu/pdf/rces/v41s1/0257-4314-rces-41-s1-22.pdf

Firmino da Costa, A., da Cruz Martins, S., Cardoso, S., Nunes, N., & Carvalho, H. (2022). Ediciones científicas y ciencias sociales: 100 números de la revista Sociología, Problemas y Prácticas. Sociología, Problemas y Prácticas, 100, 13–39. https://doi.org/10.7458/SPP202210028003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7458/SPP202210028003

Ganga-Contreras, F., Alarcón-Henríquez, N., Suárez-Amaya, W., Meleán Romero, R., Ruiz, G., & Cueva Estrada, J. (2022). Causas que originan rechazo de artículos científicos en revistas científicas latinoamericanas. Ingeniare. Revista Chilena de Ingeniería, 30(3), 602–618. https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-33052022000300602 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-33052022000300602

Ganga-Contreras, F., Garrido Cabezas, N., Godoy Cabezas, Y., & Cautin Barria, C. (2020). Acciones tendientes a incrementar la producción científica en la Universidad de Tarapacá-Chile. Revista Ciencias Sociales, 26(3), 297–311. https://doi.org/10.31876/rcs.v26i3.33250 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31876/rcs.v26i3.33250

Ganga-Contreras, F., Paredes, L., & Pedraja, L. (2015). Importancia de las publicaciones académicas en el ámbito de la gestión organizacional: algunos problemas a tener en cuenta. Revista Idesia, 33(4), 111–119. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-34292015000400014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-34292015000400014

García, J. A., Rodriguez-Sánchez, R., & Fdez-Valdivia, J. (2015). The author-editor game. Scientometrics, 104, 361–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1566-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1566-x

García Hernández, A. & García González, M. (2023). Las revistas científicas: principal vía de socialización de los resultados de investigación. Referencia Pedagógica, 11(1), 138–153. http://scielo.sld.cu/pdf/rp/v11n1/2308-3042-rp-11-01-138.pdf

Geletkanycz, M., & Tepper, B. J. (2012). Publishing in AMJ-part 6: Discussing the implications. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), 256–260. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.4002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.4002

Gisbert, J. & Chaparro, M. (2023). Reglas y consejos para ser un buen revisor por pares de manuscritos científicos. Gastroenterología y Hepatología, 46(3), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gastrohep.2022.03.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gastrohep.2022.03.005

Grant, A. M., & Pollock, T. G. (2011). Publishing in AMJ-Part 3: Setting the hook. Academy of Management Journal, 54(5), 873–879. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.4000 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.4000

Hamui-Sutton, A., & Varela-Ruiz, M. (2013). The focus group technique. Investigación en Educación Médica, 2(5), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2007-5057(13)72683-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2007-5057(13)72683-8

Huisman, J. & Smits, J. (2017). Duration and quality of the peer review process: The author’s perspective. Scientometrics, 113, 633–650. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2310-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2310-5

Javed, F., Michelogiannakis, D., & Rossouw, P. E. (2024). Editorial bullying: An exploration of acts impacting publication ethics and related environment. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 9, Article 1345553. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2024.1345553 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2024.1345553

Krueger, R. (1991). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Sage Publications.

Matias-Guiu, J. (2020). The role of scientific journal editors during the COVID-19 pandemic. The role of scientific journal editors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Neurologia, 35(4), 223–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nrl.2020.05.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nrleng.2020.05.011

Mendoza, S., & Paravic, T. (2006). Origen, clasificación y desafíos de las Revistas Científicas. Investigación y Postgrado, 21(1), 49–75. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/658/65821103.pdf

Moher, D., & Altman, D. G. (2015). Four proposals to help improve the medical research literature. PLoS Medicine, 12(9), Article e1001864. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001864 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001864

Moher, D., Galipeau, J., Alam, S., Barbour, V., Bartolomeos, K., Baskin, P., Bell-Syer, S., Cobey, K. D., Chan, L., Clark, J., Deeks, J., Flanagin, A., Garner, P., Glenny, A.-M., Groves, T., Gurusamy, K., Habibzadeh, F., Jewell-Thomas, S., Kelsall, D., & Zhaori, G. (2017). Core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals: Consensus statement. BMC Medicine, 15, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0927-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0927-0

Muradchanian, J., Hoekstra, R., Kiers, H., & van Ravenzwaaij, D. (2023). The role of results in deciding to publish: A direct comparison across authors, reviewers, and editors based on an online survey. PLoS ONE, 18(10), Article e0292279. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0292279 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0292279

Musselin, C. (2013). How peer review empowers the academic profession and university managers: Changes in relationships between the state, universities and the professoriate. Research Policy, 42(5), 1165–1173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.02.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.02.002

Nino, Jr, J. (2024). An analysis of university management in western Mexico. Gestión de la Educación, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.15517/rge.v10i1.56337 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15517/rge.v10i1.56337

Oxhorn, P. (2015). Production, quality and dissemination of scientific journals of the 21st century. Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 77(Supl. 1), 39–44. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/321/32141043004.pdf

O'Brien, A., Graf, C., & McKellar, K. (2019). How publishers and editors can help early career researchers: Recommendations from a roundtable discussion. Learned Publishing, 32(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1249 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1249

Paulus, T. M., & Lester, J. N. (2016). ATLAS.ti for conversation and discourse analysis studies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(4), 405–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1021949 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1021949

Plata-Caviedes, T., Córdoba-Salgado, O. A., & Trzesniak, P. (2012). Dictámenes en Revistas Científicas: lo que Necesitan los Editores y Autores, lo que Hacen los Evaluadores. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 21(1), 37–55. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=80424036004

Ramírez-Cardona, A., & Calderón-Hernández, G. (2024). Organizational coupling in higher education institutions: Challenges for university governance. International Studies of Management & Organization, 54(2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2023.2301210 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2023.2301210

Repiso, R., Torres-Salinas, D., & Aguaded, I. (2019). Journal management. Universal transfer merit. Fair and necessary. Anuario ThinkEPI, 13, Article e13103. https://doi.org/10.3145/thinkepi.2019.e13e03 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3145/thinkepi.2019.e13e03

Rodas Pacheco, F. D., & Pacheco Salazar, V. G. (2020). Focus groups: Framework for their implementation. INNOVA Research Journal, 5(3), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.33890/innova.v5.n3.2020.1401 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33890/innova.v5.n3.2020.1401

Rodríguez, E. G. (2013). Editorial peer review: Roles and processes. Revista Cubana de Información en Ciencias de la Salud, 24(2), 160–175. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3776/377648460006.pdf

Rojas, G. M., Linares Herrera, M. P., & Hernández, C. F. (2022). Theoretical conceptions of editorial processes in scientific journals from a regulatory approach. In E. H. Veria (Ed.), Advanced notes in information science (Vol. 1, pp. 90–106). ColNes Publishing. https://doi.org/10.47909/anis.978-9916-9760-0-5.99 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47909/anis.978-9916-9760-0-5.99

Schonhaut Berman, L., Millán Klusse, T., & Podestá López, L. (2017). Peer review: Evidence and challenges. Revista Chilena de Pediatría, 88(5), 577–581. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0370-41062017000500001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0370-41062017000500001

Severin, A., & Chataway, J. (2021). Purposes of peer review: A qualitative study of stakeholder expectations and perceptions. Learned Publishing, 34, 144–155. http://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1336 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1336

Downloads

Published

2024-11-30

How to Cite

Ganga-Contreras, F., Alarcón, N., Suárez-Amaya, W., & Álvarez-Maldonado, D. (2024). Editorial practices and policies of scientific journals that make authors uncomfortable. Iberoamerican Journal of Science Measurement and Communication, 4(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.47909/ijsmc.1454

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 3 (2024): Iberoamerican Journal of Science Measurement and Communication

Section

Original article

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Francisco Ganga-Contreras, Nancy Alarcón, Wendolin Suárez-Amaya, David Álvarez-Maldonado

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC 4.0, which permits copying and redistributing the material in any medium or format, adapting, transforming, and building upon the material as long as the license terms are followed.

Funding data