Purpose:This study investigated the publication behaviour of 573 chief editors managing 432 Social Sciences journals in Turkey.Direct inquiries into editorial qualifications are rare,and this research aims to shed lig...Purpose:This study investigated the publication behaviour of 573 chief editors managing 432 Social Sciences journals in Turkey.Direct inquiries into editorial qualifications are rare,and this research aims to shed light on editors’scientific leadership capabilities.Design/methodology/approach:This study contrasts insider publication behaviour in national journals with international articles in journals indexed by the Web of Science(WOS)and Scopus.It argues that editors demonstrating a consistent ability to publish in competitive WOS and Scopus indexed journals signal high qualifications,while editors with persistent insider behaviour and strong local orientation signal low qualification.Scientific leadership capability is measured by first-authored publications.Correlation and various regression tests are conducted to identify significant determinants of publication behaviour.Findings:International publications are rare and concentrated on a few individuals,while insider publications are endemic and constitute nearly 40%of all national articles.Editors publish 3.2 insider papers and 8.1 national papers for every SSCI article.62%(58%)of the editors have no SSCI(Scopus)article,53%(63%)do not have a single lead-authored WOS(Scopus)article,and 89%publish at least one insider paper.Only a minority consistently publish in international journals;a fifth of the editors have three or more SSCI publications,and a quarter have three or more Scopus articles.Editors with foreign Ph.D.degrees are the most qualified and internationally oriented,whereas non-mobile editors are the most underqualified and underperform other editors by every measure.Illustrating the overall lack of qualification,nearly half of the professor editors and the majority of the WOS and Scopus indexed journal editors have no record of SSCI or Scopus publications.Research limitations:This research relies on local settings that encourage national publications at the expense of international journals.Findings should be evaluated in light of this setting and bearing in mind that narrow localities are more prone to peer favouritism.Practical implications:Incompetent and nepotistic editors pose an imminent threat to Turkish national literature.A lasting solution would likely include the dismissal and replacement of unqualified editors,as well as delisting and closure of dozens of journals that operate in questionable ways and serve little scientific purpose.Originality/value:To my knowledge,this is the first study to document the publication behaviour of national journal chief editors.展开更多
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 ...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.展开更多
文摘Purpose:This study investigated the publication behaviour of 573 chief editors managing 432 Social Sciences journals in Turkey.Direct inquiries into editorial qualifications are rare,and this research aims to shed light on editors’scientific leadership capabilities.Design/methodology/approach:This study contrasts insider publication behaviour in national journals with international articles in journals indexed by the Web of Science(WOS)and Scopus.It argues that editors demonstrating a consistent ability to publish in competitive WOS and Scopus indexed journals signal high qualifications,while editors with persistent insider behaviour and strong local orientation signal low qualification.Scientific leadership capability is measured by first-authored publications.Correlation and various regression tests are conducted to identify significant determinants of publication behaviour.Findings:International publications are rare and concentrated on a few individuals,while insider publications are endemic and constitute nearly 40%of all national articles.Editors publish 3.2 insider papers and 8.1 national papers for every SSCI article.62%(58%)of the editors have no SSCI(Scopus)article,53%(63%)do not have a single lead-authored WOS(Scopus)article,and 89%publish at least one insider paper.Only a minority consistently publish in international journals;a fifth of the editors have three or more SSCI publications,and a quarter have three or more Scopus articles.Editors with foreign Ph.D.degrees are the most qualified and internationally oriented,whereas non-mobile editors are the most underqualified and underperform other editors by every measure.Illustrating the overall lack of qualification,nearly half of the professor editors and the majority of the WOS and Scopus indexed journal editors have no record of SSCI or Scopus publications.Research limitations:This research relies on local settings that encourage national publications at the expense of international journals.Findings should be evaluated in light of this setting and bearing in mind that narrow localities are more prone to peer favouritism.Practical implications:Incompetent and nepotistic editors pose an imminent threat to Turkish national literature.A lasting solution would likely include the dismissal and replacement of unqualified editors,as well as delisting and closure of dozens of journals that operate in questionable ways and serve little scientific purpose.Originality/value:To my knowledge,this is the first study to document the publication behaviour of national journal chief editors.
文摘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.
