Research and publication are important to today 's teacher-scholar. Gettingpublished in refereed
journals is considered by many the surest way to tenure and promotion. Peer review has not
been a popular area of study, but, increasingly, questions are being raised about current peer
review practices in a variety of disciplines, including mass communication. This study examines
peer review practices in mass communication. Results indicate that both researchers and
referees have mixed feelings about peer review and about specific journals, but that they are
dissatisfied with particular philosophies that underlie scholarship in the discipline.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aron, R.H., and P. Yu.1989. The publication game. Journal of Geography88, no. 1:21-22.
2.
Bailar, J.D., and K. Patterson.1985. Journal peer review. New England Journal of Medicine312:654-57.
3.
Banner, J.J.1988. Preserving the integrity of peer review. Scholarly Publishing 19, no. 2:109-15.
4.
Carey, J.W.1987. Will the center hold? In Mass communication review yearbook, vol. 6., ed. M. Gurevitch and M. Levy.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
5.
Cheney, L.V.1988. Humanities in America: A report to the President, the Congress and the American people. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Humanities.
6.
Chesebro, J.W.1987. The peer review system. Communication Quarterly35, no. 4:i-v.
7.
Coughlin, E.K.1988. Scholar who submitted bogus article to journals may be disciplined. Chronicle of Higher Education35, no. 10:A1, A7.
8.
Coughlin, E.K.1989. Social workers group plans no disciplinary action . Chronicle of Higher Education35, no. 30:A1, A6.
9.
DeFleur, M.L.1988. Research priorities in the academic world. In Communication research: The challenge of the information age, ed. N. W. Sharp.Syracuse, NY : Syracuse University Press.
10.
Forscher, B.K.1980. The role of the referee. Scholarly Publishing 11, no. 2:165-69.
11.
Fox, M. F., ed. 1985. Scholarly writing and publishing. Boulder, CO and London: Westview.
12.
Garramone, G.M., and D.J. Kennamer.1988. Professional freedom and responsibility report. Communication Theory and Methodology 17, no. 3: 5.
13.
Hopps, J.G.1989. Peer review: A trust, not a vault. Social Work34, no. 1: 3-4.
14.
Knapp, M.L., and J.A. Daly.1986. A guide to publishing in scholarly journals . Austin, TX: International Communication Association.
15.
Kraft, D.H.1987. The peer review process. Journal of the American Society for Information Science38, no. 2:81-82.
16.
Kronenfeld, J.J.1985. Publishing in journals. In Scholarly writing and publishing, ed. M. F.
Lumiansky, R.M.1979. Scholarly communication: The report of the national enquiry (American Council of Learned Societies. Baltimore, MD : Johns Hopkins University Press.
20.
Mahoney, M.J.1977. Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system. Cognitive Therapy and Research1, no. 2:161-75.
21.
Markland, M.F.1987. To the editor: On rejecting. Scholarly Publishing 18, no. 3:163-69.
22.
Pigg, R.M., Jr. 1987. Comments on the journal peer review system. Journal of School Health57, no. 1:5-6.
23.
Ryan, M.1982. Evaluating scholarly manuscripts in journalism and mass communication. Journalism Quarterly59, no. 2:273-85.
24.
Schweitzer, J.C.1988. Research article productivity by mass communication scholars . Journalism Quarterly65, no. 2:479-84.
25.
Tan, A.S.1988. Why research manuscripts are rejected. In Communication research: The challenge of the information age, ed. N. W. Sharp.Syracuse, NY : Syracuse University Press.
26.
Weaver, D., and G.C. Wilhoit.1988. A profile of JMC educators: Traits, attitudes, and values. Journalism Educator43, no. 2:4-41.
