How to motivate a reviewer with a present bias to work harder

IF 3.4 2区 管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
J.A. García , J.J. Montero-Parodi , Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez , J. Fdez-Valdivia
{"title":"How to motivate a reviewer with a present bias to work harder","authors":"J.A. García ,&nbsp;J.J. Montero-Parodi ,&nbsp;Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez ,&nbsp;J. Fdez-Valdivia","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2023.101462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Reviewers with a present bias focus on the here and now, placing more importance on immediate rewards than on future intentions and benefits. In this paper, we are going to address two related research questions: First, can a reviewer's motivation to work hard be increased by using a higher evaluation goal? Second, would a reviewer be more willing to accept a higher evaluation goal if the review process provided a large enough reward? Using a formal model, we predict that a reviewer with a present bias increases their motivation to work hard by setting a higher goal for the manuscript evaluation (relative to having no goal). For example, the reviewer is willing to control the quality of the manuscript, in addition to helping the profession and keeping themselves up to date. However, a reviewer with a severe present bias prefers to exert a low level of effort. In this situation, we find that monetary incentives can play an important role for reviewers. In their absence, a reviewer may not accept the evaluation goal that motivates them to work hard in the peer review process. In this paper, using a series of computational experiments, we discuss the behavior of a reviewer with a present bias and the role of goal intentions and additional instrumental gains.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Informetrics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157723000871","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reviewers with a present bias focus on the here and now, placing more importance on immediate rewards than on future intentions and benefits. In this paper, we are going to address two related research questions: First, can a reviewer's motivation to work hard be increased by using a higher evaluation goal? Second, would a reviewer be more willing to accept a higher evaluation goal if the review process provided a large enough reward? Using a formal model, we predict that a reviewer with a present bias increases their motivation to work hard by setting a higher goal for the manuscript evaluation (relative to having no goal). For example, the reviewer is willing to control the quality of the manuscript, in addition to helping the profession and keeping themselves up to date. However, a reviewer with a severe present bias prefers to exert a low level of effort. In this situation, we find that monetary incentives can play an important role for reviewers. In their absence, a reviewer may not accept the evaluation goal that motivates them to work hard in the peer review process. In this paper, using a series of computational experiments, we discuss the behavior of a reviewer with a present bias and the role of goal intentions and additional instrumental gains.

如何激励有当前偏见的审稿人更加努力地工作
有当前偏见的评论者关注的是此时此地,他们更重视眼前的回报,而不是未来的意图和利益。在本文中,我们将解决两个相关的研究问题:第一,使用更高的评价目标是否可以增加审稿人努力工作的动机?第二,如果审查过程提供足够大的奖励,审稿人是否更愿意接受更高的评估目标?使用一个正式的模型,我们预测有当前偏见的审稿人通过为手稿评估设定更高的目标(相对于没有目标)来增加他们努力工作的动机。例如,审稿人愿意控制稿件的质量,除了帮助专业和保持自己的最新。然而,具有严重当前偏见的审稿人倾向于付出低水平的努力。在这种情况下,我们发现金钱激励可以对审稿人发挥重要作用。在他们缺席的情况下,审稿人可能不会接受激励他们在同行评审过程中努力工作的评估目标。在本文中,我们使用一系列的计算实验,讨论了具有当前偏见的审稿人的行为以及目标意图和额外工具收益的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Informetrics
Journal of Informetrics Social Sciences-Library and Information Sciences
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
16.20%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: Journal of Informetrics (JOI) publishes rigorous high-quality research on quantitative aspects of information science. The main focus of the journal is on topics in bibliometrics, scientometrics, webometrics, patentometrics, altmetrics and research evaluation. Contributions studying informetric problems using methods from other quantitative fields, such as mathematics, statistics, computer science, economics and econometrics, and network science, are especially encouraged. JOI publishes both theoretical and empirical work. In general, case studies, for instance a bibliometric analysis focusing on a specific research field or a specific country, are not considered suitable for publication in JOI, unless they contain innovative methodological elements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信