Objective: To experimentally test for confirmational response bias among social work journals and to assess the time-liness and quality of the referee review process. Method: A positive and a negative version of two stimulus articles were sent to two randomized groups of 31 social work journals; journals were stratified by prestige; the timeliness of journal responses were recorded; four judges rated the quality of referee reviews against a high-quality referee review from a prestigious clinical psychology journal. Results: The differences in acceptance rates between positive and negative versions of the stimulus articles were significant in one case and not significant in the other. Combining the results of this experiment with a previous experiment produced significant results overall; the quality of 73.5% of the referee reviews were inadequate. Conclusion: There are substantial problems of bias, timeliness, and quality in the editorial decisions and review processes of social work journals.
Armstrong, J. S. (1997). Peer review for journals: Evidence on quality control, fairness, and innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3, 63-84.
2.
Epstein, W. M. (1990). Confirmational response bias among social work journals. Science Technology and Human Values, 15, 9-38.
3.
Flexner, A. (2001). Is social work a profession?Research on Social Work Practice, 11(2), 152-165. (Original work published 1915)
4.
Fraser, M. W. (1994). Scholarship and research in social work: Emerging challenges. Journal of Social Work Education, 30, 252-266.
5.
Fraser, M. W., Taylor, M. J., Jackson, R., & O’Jack, J. (1991). Social work and science: Many ways of knowing?Social Work Research and Abstracts, 27(4), 5-15.
6.
Gambrill, E. (1995). Less marketing and more scholarship. Social Work Research, 19, 38-46.
7.
Gambrill, E. (2001a). Educational policy and accreditation standards: Do they work for clients?Journal of Social Work Education, 37, 2-2.
8.
Gambrill, E. (2001b). Evaluating the quality of social work education: Options galore. Journal of Social Work Education, 37, 3-3.
9.
Gambrill, E. (2002). Encouraging transparency. Journal of Social Work Education, 38, 211-216.
10.
Gambrill, E. (2003). Evidence-based practice: Sea change or the emperor’snewclothes. Journal of Social Work Education, 39, 3-26.
11.
Gordon, L. (1994). Pitied but not entitled: Single mothers and the history of welfare. New York: Free Press.
12.
Green, R. G. (1998). Faculty, rank, effort, and success: A study of publication in professional journals. Journal of Social Work Education, 34, 415-427.
13.
Green, R. G., Baskind, F. R., & Best, A. (1997). Getting beyond the productivity gap: Assessing variation in social work scholarship. Journal of Social Work Education, 33, 541-555.
14.
Haveman, R. (1994). The nature, causes, and cures of poverty: Accomplishments from three decades of poverty research and policy. In S. H. Danziger, G. D. Sandefur, & D. H. Weinberg (Eds.), Confronting poverty: Prescriptions for change (pp. 438-450). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
Heineman, M. B. (1981). The obsolete scientific imperative in social work. Social Service Review, 55, 8-34.
16.
Hilgartner, S. (1997). The Sokal affair in context. Science Technology & Human Values, 22, 506-522.
17.
Karger, H. J. (1999). The politics of social work research. Research on Social Work Practice, 9, 96-99.
18.
Katz, J. (1986). The silent world of doctor and patient. New York: Free Press.
19.
Kintz, B. L., Delprato, D. J., Metee, D. R., Persons, C. E., & Schappe, R. H. (1965). The experimenter effect. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 223-232.
20.
Kirk, S. A., & Franke, T. M. (1997). Agreeing to disagree: A study of the reliability of manuscript reviews. Social Work Research, 21, 121-126.
21.
Kirk, S. A., & Reid, W. J. (2002). Science and social work: A critical appraisal. New York: Columbia University Press.
22.
Leiby, J. (1978). A history of social welfare and social work in the United States. New York: Columbia University Press.
23.
Ligon, J., Thyer, B. A., & Dixon, D. (1995). Academic affiliations of those published in social work journals: A productivity analysis. Journal of Social Work Education, 31, 169-176.
24.
Lindsey, D. (1978). The scientific publication system in social science: A study of the operation of leading professional journals in psychology, sociology, and social work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
25.
Lindsey, D., & Kirk, S. A. (1992). The role of social work journals in the development of a knowledge base for the profession. Social Service Review, 66, 295-310.
26.
Lubove, R. (1965). The professional altruist: The emergence of social work as a career. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27.
Mahoney, S. J. (1977). Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1, 161-175.
28.
Martin, B. (1999). Suppressing research data: Methods, context, accountability, and responses. Accountability in Research, 6, 333-372.
29.
Mohan, B. (2002). Social work revisited. Available from www.Xlibris.com
30.
National Association of Social Workers. (1997). An author’s guide to social work journals. Washington, DC: NASW Press.
31.
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175-220.
32.
Orne, M. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist, 10, 776-783.
33.
Pardeck, J. T. (1992). Are social work editorial boards competent? Some disquieting data with implications for research on social work practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 2, 487-496.
34.
Peters, D. P., & Ceci, S. J. (1982). Peer review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles submitted again. Behavior and Brain Sciences, 5, 187-195.
35.
“Quality” and refereeing practices in economics journals. (2002). Royal Economic Society Newsletter, 119(October), 11-12.
36.
Ravetz, J. R. (1971). Scientific knowledge and its social problems. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
37.
Rosen, A., Proctor, E. K., & Staudt, M. (1999). Social work research and the quest for effective practice. Social Work Research, 23, 4-14.
38.
Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638-641.
39.
Rosenthal, R. (2003). Covert communication in laboratories, classrooms, and the truly real world. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 151-154.
40.
Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1978). Interpersonal expectancy effects: The first 345 studies. Behavior and Brain Sciences, 3, 379-386.
41.
Schuerman, J. (1983). Research and evaluation in the human services. New York: Free Press.
42.
Seidl, C., Schmidt, U., & Grosche, P. (2003). Beauty contest of referee processes of economic journals: Preliminary results. Unpublished manuscript.
43.
Sokal, A. D., & Bricmont, J. (1998). Fashionable nonsense: Postmodern intellectuals’ abuse of science. New York: Picador USA.
44.
Stoesz, D. (2002). From social work to human services. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 29, 19-37.
45.
Task Force on Quality in Graduate Social Work Education, National Conference of Deans and Directors of Graduate Schools of Social Work. (1984). Towards excellence in graduate social work education in the United States. Arlington, VA: Council on Social Work Education.
46.
Task Force on Social Work Research. (1991). Building social work knowledge for effective services and policies: A plan for research development. Austin: University of Texas, School of Social Work.
47.
Thyer, B. A., & Myers, L. L. (2003). An empirical evaluation of the editorial practices of social work journals. Journal of Social Work Education, 39, 125-142.
48.
Thyer, B. A., & Polk, G. (1997). Social work and psychology professors’scholarly productivity: A controlled comparison of cited journal articles. Journal of Applied Social Sciences, 21, 105-110.
