[AISWorld] Fwd: Re: On quality of journals and quality of reviews !
Ejub Kajan
ejubkajan at sbb.rs
Thu Oct 17 10:48:21 EDT 2013
Dear Denis,
Many thank for your prompt replay. But I am looking to see is replay from
aisworld community at large.
thanks
Ejub
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 16:37:04 +0200, Galletta, Dennis
<galletta at katz.pitt.edu> wrote:
>
> As a journal editor, these stories are always frightening. But to
> provide a little levity, and a few smiles, you MUST read the >following
> blog entry so you can see the hilarious clues about the paper’s
> authenticity, or lack thereof:
>
> http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2013/09/23/a-serbian-sokal-authors-spoof-pub-with-ron-jeremy-and-michael->jackson-references/
>
> It will lead you to try and read a little of the paper, only to recoil
> in pain and agony.
>
>
> In that otherwise hilarious blog, some were questioning the actual
> existence of the journal. I am unable to find the journal in >the EBSCO
> system under Engineering, so the jury still seems to be out given some
> of their links are to EBSCO that purport to >defend its existence. This
> recalls a famous similar hoax in 1996 by Sokal that has been covered
> extensively elsewhere >(outlined nicely in Wikipedia at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair).
>
> I believe the editorial process will stand up to these jokes. The
> marginal journals are the most vulnerable. But in any event, >reviewers
> and editors obviously should read the papers they agree to review.
>
>
> DG
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dennis F. Galletta Professor of Business
> Administration
>
> University of Pittsburgh and Director, Katz Doctoral
> Program
>
> 282a Mervis Hall Katz Graduate School of
> Business
>
> Phone +1 412-648-1699 Pittsburgh, PA
> 15260
>
> E-mail: galletta @ Fax +1
> 412-648-1693
>
> katz.pitt.edu homepage:
> www.pitt.edu/~galletta
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> From: aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org
> [mailto:aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org] On Behalf Of Ejub Kajan
> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 10:03 AM
> To: aisworld at lists.aisnet.org
> Cc: ekajan at ieee.org
> Subject: [AISWorld] Fwd: Re: On quality of journals and quality of
> reviews !
>
>
> Wake up people,
>
>
>
>
>> ------- Forwarded message -------
> From: "Ejub Kajan" <ejubkajan at sbb.rs>
> To: aisworld at lists.aisnet.org
> Cc: ekajan at ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [AISWorld] On quality of journals and quality of reviews !
> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 15:27:25 +0200
>
> My dear friends and colleges,
>
>
> Attached is an article that addressed several important issues on papers
> reviews, where the misserable of review process *or not >at all) has
> occurred . Authors have proved , with a lot of carriage (the paper has
> made intentionally), that everything is possible if >there no control
> over it, that so-called scientific people may reach full professor
> positions due that administration.
>
>
> I would like to pay attention to reference section where Walt Disney
> actor has been cited, Laplas has given his oppinion on the >Web and many
> other stpitides,
>
>
> Actually, there is no reviews, authors paid for paper appearance,
> conditions applied are cited articles in that journal and paid fee.
>
> WHAT ISI (THOMSON REUTERS) yet wait to send this journal into history.
>
>
> I think that authors of this paper should be reworded by many thanks by
> scientific community.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ejub
>
>
>
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 00:25:57 +0200, John Lamp <john.lamp at deakin.edu.au>
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> When dealing with new reviewers, you could not really do better than to
>> direct them to Allen Lee’s note on reviewing a >>manuscript for
>> publication. It was originally published in the Journal of Operations
>> Management, but is online at:
>>
>> http://www.people.vcu.edu/~aslee/referee.htm
>>
>>
>> Fifteen simple (well maybe) criteria to address to create a decent
>> review. I still refresh my mind from it when doing a >>review.
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> From: aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org
>> [mailto:aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org] On Behalf Of William Tastle
>> Sent: Thursday, 17 October 2013 12:43 AM
>> To: aisworld at lists.aisnet.org
>> Subject: Re: [AISWorld] On quality of journals and quality of reviews !
>>
>>
>> I, too, am a former journal editor and the difficulties in securing
>> proper reviewers is sometimes a bit of a challenge. >>However, I
>> consider it a responsibility of scholars to engage in a mentoring
>> function with respect to paper reviewing. In >>general, the best
>> reviews are from the senior researchers and hence, they are thepeople
>> most bombarded with review >>requests. Those reviews are nurturing and
>> guiding as they attempt to raise the quality of content (and writing
>> style) such >>that the paper crosses the threshold of acceptability.
>> The worst reviews, again speaking very generally and without benefit
>> >>of a scientific effort to confirm my experiential observations, are
>> from the younger, or perhaps more insecure, scholars who >>seemingly
>> engage in a “slap leather” attitude towards the review process. Their
>> reviews are more apt (again, a >>generalization) to be vicious in
>> content and of little use to the paper author.
>>
>>
>> I recall a story from Ben Schneiderman about how his seminal paper on
>> structure diagrams was severely trashed by some >>reviewers until it
>> was finally published, only to become one of the most downloaded papers
>> in the journal’s history. I heard >>a similar story, again first hand,
>> from Lotfi Zadeh on his theory of fuzzy sets. They persevered to
>> success. We have a >>responsibility to mentor our colleagues, just as
>> we have (hopefully) been mentored ourselves.
>>
>>
>> However, this does not excuse a poorly written or researched paper.
>> That is sloppy work and papers of that sort should >>simply be returned
>> to the authors without any review until the basic threshold of
>> scientific literacy is reached.
>>
>>
>> Bill Tastle, Professor of IS, Ithaca College
>>
>>
>> From: aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org
>> [mailto:aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org] On Behalf Of MurphJen at aol.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:42 PM
>> To: mmora at securenym.net; aisworld at lists.aisnet.org
>> Subject: Re: [AISWorld] On quality of journals and quality of reviews !
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure what the point of the below is but I'll add my perception
>> as a journal editor in chief. Quite frankly authors are lucky to get
>> >>reviews. I have seen a flood of submissions the last 2 years from
>> all parts of the world where before I saw mostly US and European
>> >>submissions. I think this is good but, there are a lot of junior
>> level papers and not enough senior level reviewers to go around. The
>> >>trend I do not like is that of authors feeling it is their right to
>> get their reviews quick. I'm not sure if this is an output of the open
>> >>source journals that have promised fast turnarounds, but to get
>> quality reviews takes time as there simply aren't enough quality
>> >>reviewers who have the time to be almost full time reviewers. My
>> gripe (and I admit it is as an EiC) is that it seems everyone
>> wants/>>has to author papers and few have the desire/time to review.
>> Also, unfortunately, new authors don't seem to understand the concept
>> >>of a thorough literature review and seem to have taken the debate on
>> the ethics of recommending papers from the journal being >>submitted
>> to, or of previous papers from senior reviewers as license to ignore
>> them.
>>
>> This leads to my major question: Why should a journal spend limited
>> reviewing resources on doing thorough reviews of papers that >>do not
>> meet the basic standard of scholarly research by grounding themselves
>> in the literature.
>>
>>
>> I am tired of the excuse that the authors do not have access to the
>> articles so they ignore them. I see so much research that >>authors
>> consider new but is at best a minor extension of something that has
>> been published but the authors did not or could not get >>the article
>> to know it.
>>
>>
>> I think we are at a crossroads of scholarly literature. We argue about
>> plagiarism but I think we are seeing a greater issue of authors >>not
>> looking at the literature so that they can make the claim "there is
>> little research" or that "this is new" as a justification for their
>> >>paper. To give credit we have to recognize the research that has
>> been done, to build a body of knowledge we have to build on what >>has
>> been done, not do it over and over again.
>>
>>
>> If authors want quality reviews they need to show the respect to the
>> senior scholars by at least looking at their work and building on >>it
>> rather than trying to waste their time by making them tell them what
>> literature to look at rather than addressing the quality of the >>paper.
>>
>>
>> Also, I propose that we establish a new ethic: authors can only submit
>> if they serve as reviewers. I am also tired of hearing the cries >>of
>> needing to get published to get tenure or promotion so they don't have
>> time to review. We need all universities to start recognizing >>the
>> intellectual contribution of reviewing as being on equal or near equal
>> par with authoring. Do this and we will all have quality >>reviews.
>>
>>
>> sorry to rant but you can see this has touched a nerve that has been
>> throbbing for a while.
>>
>>
>> Murray E. Jennex, Professor of MIS, San Diego State University
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 10/15/2013 5:05:48 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
>> mmora at securenym.net writes:
>>>
>>> Dear colleagues,
>>> In past weeks, a strong and relevant debate on the academic influence
>>> of ISI listed journals was discussed in this forum. Well, on same ideas
>>> I wonder whether there are studies on the quality of the reviewers
>>> (e.g.
>>> level of seniority, level of expertise in the topic, level of expertise
>>> on research methods, and in particular on the role played as peers
>>> seeking to improve the advance of science and suggesting clear insights
>>> rather some simple elaborations of flaws without any rational
>>> justification).
>>> In summary, are we living in a spiral of hard reviewers and bad
>>> researchers?
>>> or rather the opposite one is the reality? I am sure that Senior
>>> researchers
>>> will have reviewed rare reviews from people with less expertise and
>>> seniority
>>> level, so comments on it are welcome ! Of course, this non ethical
>>> practice
>>> should be eliminated. As a funny real history, a Mexican top researcher
>>> in Education received a strong critique on the null value of paper that
>>> he wrote, and the suggestion was to use some papers writen by him in
>>> the
>>> past (of course, the reviewers did know it). I know of other cases
>>> similar
>>> cases. Well, sciences is about truthness but wrong reviews maybe are
>>> now a
>>> real headache ! Cheers !
>>> Manuel Mora
>>> ACM Senior Member
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AISWorld mailing list
>>> AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
>>
>>
>>>> Important Notice: The contents of this email are intended solely for
>>>> the named addressee and are confidential; any unauthorised use,
>>>> reproduction or >>storage of the contents is expressly prohibited. If
>>>> you have received this email in error, please delete it and any
>>>> attachments immediately and advise the >>sender by return email or
>>>> telephone.
>>
>> Deakin University does not warrant that this email and any attachments
>> are error or virus free.
>
>
>
>
>> --
>
> Ejub Kajan
>
> State University of Novi Pazar
>
> Editor of Electronic Business Interoperability: Concepts, Opportunities
> and Challenges
>
> Editor of Handbook of Research on E-Business Standards and Protocols
>
>
> Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>
>
>
>
>> --
>
> Ejub Kajan
>
> State University of Novi Pazar
>
> Editor of Electronic Business Interoperability: Concepts, Opportunities
> and Challenges
>
> Editor of Handbook of Research on E-Business Standards and Protocols
>
>
> Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
--
Ejub Kajan
State University of Novi Pazar
Editor of Electronic Business Interoperability: Concepts, Opportunities
and Challenges
Editor of Handbook of Research on E-Business Standards and Protocols
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aisnet.org/pipermail/aisworld_lists.aisnet.org/attachments/20131017/835d7d7a/attachment.html>
More information about the AISWorld
mailing list