编辑委员会出版策略和土耳其国家期刊的接受率

Lokman Tutuncu
{"title":"编辑委员会出版策略和土耳其国家期刊的接受率","authors":"Lokman Tutuncu","doi":"10.2478/jdis-2023-0019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Purpose This study takes advantage of newly released journal metrics to investigate whether local journals with more qualified boards have lower acceptance rates, based on data from 219 Turkish national journals and 2,367 editorial board members. Design/methodology/approach This study argues that journal editors can signal their scholarly quality by publishing in reputable journals. Conversely, editors publishing inside articles in affiliated national journals would send negative signals. The research predicts that high (low) quality editorial boards will conduct more (less) selective evaluation and their journals will have lower (higher) acceptance rates. Based on the publication strategy of editors, four measures of board quality are defined: Number of board inside publications per editor (INSIDER), number of board Social Sciences Citation Index publications per editor (SSCI), inside-to-SSCI article ratio (ISRA), and board citation per editor (CITATION). Predictions are tested by correlation and regression analysis. Findings Low-quality board proxies (INSIDER, ISRA) are positively, and high-quality board proxies (SSCI, CITATION) are negatively associated with acceptance rates. Further, we find that receiving a larger number of submissions, greater women representation on boards, and Web of Science and Scopus (WOSS) coverage are associated with lower acceptance rates. Acceptance rates for journals range from 12% to 91%, with an average of 54% and a median of 53%. Law journals have significantly higher average acceptance rate (68%) than other journals, while WOSS journals have the lowest (43%). Findings indicate some of the highest acceptance rates in Social Sciences literature, including competitive Business and Economics journals that traditionally have low acceptance rates. Limitations Research relies on local context to define publication strategy of editors. Findings may not be generalizable to mainstream journals and core science countries where emphasis on research quality is stronger and editorial selection is based on scientific merit. Practical implications Results offer useful insights into editorial management of national journals and allow us to make sense of local editorial practices. The importance of scientific merit for selection to national journal editorial boards is particularly highlighted for sound editorial evaluation of submitted manuscripts. Originality/value This is the first attempt to document a significant relation between acceptance rates and editorial board publication behavior.","PeriodicalId":92237,"journal":{"name":"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)","volume":"0 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editorial board publication strategy and acceptance rates in Turkish national journals\",\"authors\":\"Lokman Tutuncu\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/jdis-2023-0019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Purpose This study takes advantage of newly released journal metrics to investigate whether local journals with more qualified boards have lower acceptance rates, based on data from 219 Turkish national journals and 2,367 editorial board members. Design/methodology/approach This study argues that journal editors can signal their scholarly quality by publishing in reputable journals. Conversely, editors publishing inside articles in affiliated national journals would send negative signals. The research predicts that high (low) quality editorial boards will conduct more (less) selective evaluation and their journals will have lower (higher) acceptance rates. Based on the publication strategy of editors, four measures of board quality are defined: Number of board inside publications per editor (INSIDER), number of board Social Sciences Citation Index publications per editor (SSCI), inside-to-SSCI article ratio (ISRA), and board citation per editor (CITATION). Predictions are tested by correlation and regression analysis. Findings Low-quality board proxies (INSIDER, ISRA) are positively, and high-quality board proxies (SSCI, CITATION) are negatively associated with acceptance rates. Further, we find that receiving a larger number of submissions, greater women representation on boards, and Web of Science and Scopus (WOSS) coverage are associated with lower acceptance rates. Acceptance rates for journals range from 12% to 91%, with an average of 54% and a median of 53%. Law journals have significantly higher average acceptance rate (68%) than other journals, while WOSS journals have the lowest (43%). Findings indicate some of the highest acceptance rates in Social Sciences literature, including competitive Business and Economics journals that traditionally have low acceptance rates. Limitations Research relies on local context to define publication strategy of editors. Findings may not be generalizable to mainstream journals and core science countries where emphasis on research quality is stronger and editorial selection is based on scientific merit. Practical implications Results offer useful insights into editorial management of national journals and allow us to make sense of local editorial practices. The importance of scientific merit for selection to national journal editorial boards is particularly highlighted for sound editorial evaluation of submitted manuscripts. Originality/value This is the first attempt to document a significant relation between acceptance rates and editorial board publication behavior.\",\"PeriodicalId\":92237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)\",\"volume\":\"0 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2023-0019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2023-0019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要目的本研究利用最新发布的期刊指标,基于219家土耳其国家期刊和2367名编委会成员的数据,调查拥有更多合格委员会的地方期刊是否接受率较低。设计/方法论/方法本研究认为,期刊编辑可以通过在声誉良好的期刊上发表文章来表明他们的学术素质。相反,编辑在附属国家期刊上发表内部文章会发出负面信号。研究预测,高(低)质量的编委会将进行更多(更少)的选择性评估,他们的期刊接受率将更低(更高)。根据编辑的出版策略,定义了四个衡量董事会质量的指标:每位编辑的董事会内部出版物数量(INSIDER)、每位编辑的社会科学引文索引出版物数量(SSCI)、内部与SSCI文章比率(ISRA)和每位编辑员的董事会引文数量(Citation)。预测通过相关和回归分析进行检验。调查结果低质量董事会代理(INSIDER,ISRA)与接受率呈正相关,高质量董事会代理人(SSCI,CITATION)与接受度呈负相关。此外,我们发现,收到更多的投稿、女性在董事会中的代表性以及科学与Scopus网络(WOSS)的覆盖率与较低的接受率有关。期刊的接受率从12%到91%不等,平均为54%,中位数为53%。法律期刊的平均接受率(68%)明显高于其他期刊,而WOSS期刊的平均接收率最低(43%)。研究结果表明,一些社会科学文献的接受率最高,包括传统上接受率较低的竞争性商业和经济学期刊。局限性研究依赖于当地环境来定义编辑的出版策略。研究结果可能无法推广到主流期刊和核心科学国家,因为这些国家更重视研究质量,编辑选择基于科学价值。实际意义研究结果为国家期刊的编辑管理提供了有用的见解,并使我们能够理解当地的编辑实践。科学价值对国家期刊编辑委员会选拔的重要性尤其突出,因为它对提交的稿件进行了良好的编辑评估。原创性/价值这是首次尝试记录接受率与编委会出版行为之间的显著关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Editorial board publication strategy and acceptance rates in Turkish national journals
Abstract Purpose This study takes advantage of newly released journal metrics to investigate whether local journals with more qualified boards have lower acceptance rates, based on data from 219 Turkish national journals and 2,367 editorial board members. Design/methodology/approach This study argues that journal editors can signal their scholarly quality by publishing in reputable journals. Conversely, editors publishing inside articles in affiliated national journals would send negative signals. The research predicts that high (low) quality editorial boards will conduct more (less) selective evaluation and their journals will have lower (higher) acceptance rates. Based on the publication strategy of editors, four measures of board quality are defined: Number of board inside publications per editor (INSIDER), number of board Social Sciences Citation Index publications per editor (SSCI), inside-to-SSCI article ratio (ISRA), and board citation per editor (CITATION). Predictions are tested by correlation and regression analysis. Findings Low-quality board proxies (INSIDER, ISRA) are positively, and high-quality board proxies (SSCI, CITATION) are negatively associated with acceptance rates. Further, we find that receiving a larger number of submissions, greater women representation on boards, and Web of Science and Scopus (WOSS) coverage are associated with lower acceptance rates. Acceptance rates for journals range from 12% to 91%, with an average of 54% and a median of 53%. Law journals have significantly higher average acceptance rate (68%) than other journals, while WOSS journals have the lowest (43%). Findings indicate some of the highest acceptance rates in Social Sciences literature, including competitive Business and Economics journals that traditionally have low acceptance rates. Limitations Research relies on local context to define publication strategy of editors. Findings may not be generalizable to mainstream journals and core science countries where emphasis on research quality is stronger and editorial selection is based on scientific merit. Practical implications Results offer useful insights into editorial management of national journals and allow us to make sense of local editorial practices. The importance of scientific merit for selection to national journal editorial boards is particularly highlighted for sound editorial evaluation of submitted manuscripts. Originality/value This is the first attempt to document a significant relation between acceptance rates and editorial board publication behavior.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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