Wouter,
Perhaps a sample of what you are looking for is found in the annual
reports for the American Economic Association Journals. These normally
appear in the May Papers and Proceedings issue. Here is a link to the
most recent one
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.103.3
Take a look, for example at the reports for the American Economic Review
and for the
various American Economic Journal: xxx
They report the number of articles submitted, number accepted, a list
of referees, and so on. I think they also at least sometimes report
figures on delay times from submission to acceptance and or publication.
The January issues of Econometrica also have annual reports that include
most of this information.
I would be interested to hear about other similar information that you
uncover.
Cheers,
Ted
On 12/21/13 11:50 AM, Gerritsma, Wouter wrote:
Dear Bo-Christer,
I am aware of the really useful studies your group makes.
However, I am looking into the the transparence of the eer review
process on the journals side.
A self included analysis on the journals side, say yearly, on the
number of submissions, the acceptance rates would be helpful as an
indicators for transparence of the peer review process. Another of
such examples is thanking the peer reviewers eg.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=0737-8831&volume=31&issue=4&articleid=17099955&show=html
In that case you have an indication that additional people (beyonf the
editorial board) wer involved in the peer review process.
Thanks for your reading tips. But it is not exactly what I was looking
for.
Wouter
*From:*[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
Behalf Of *Bo-Christer Björk
*Sent:* zaterdag 21 december 2013 18:27
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* [GOAL] Re: Joint Statement on Principles of Transparency
and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
You could check out
http://openaccesspublishing.org/oa11/article.pdf
as well as
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157713000710
green version
http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto/preprints/Journalacceptancerates.pdf
<http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/%7Esugimoto/preprints/Journalacceptancerates.pdf>
Bo-Christer
On 12/21/13 5:43 PM, Gerritsma, Wouter wrote:
Dear all,
With regards to this really excellent initiative I am looking in
to the various degrees in transparency of the peer review process.
Has anybody examples at hand of editorials, where they give an
overview of number of articles submitted, and ultimately accepted,
and the time the whole cycle from submission to final publication
actually took. So now and then I have seen this in journals, but
can't find any example right now.
I would be grateful for some hints.
Wouter
Wouter Gerritsma
Team leader research support
Information Specialist -- Bibliometrician
Wageningen UR Library
PO box 9100
6700 HA Wageningen
The Netherlands
++31 3174 83052
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]%0d>
wageningenur.nl/library <http://wageningenur.nl/library>
@wowter <http://twitter.com/Wowter/>
wowter.net <http://wowter.net/>
#AWCP http://tinyurl.com/mk65m36
*From:*[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Claire Redhead
*Sent:* donderdag 19 december 2013 16:41
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* [GOAL] Joint Statement on Principles of Transparency
and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
The Committee on Publication Ethics
<http://publicationethics.org/%E2%80%8E>, the Directory of Open
Access Journals <http://www.doaj.org/>, the Open Access Scholarly
Publishers Association <http://oaspa.org/>, and the World
Association of Medical Editors <http://www.wame.org/> are
scholarly organizations that have seen an increase in the number
of membership applications from both legitimate and non-legitimate
publishers and journals. Our organizations have collaborated in an
effort to identify principles of transparency and best practice
that set apart legitimate journals and publishers from
non-legitimate ones and to clarify that these principles form part
of the criteria on which membership applications will be evaluated.
This is a work in progress and we welcome feedback on the general
principles and the specific criteria. Please see the full
statement
<http://oaspa.org/principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing/>
on the OASPA blog (http://oaspa.org/blog/).
Claire Redhead
Membership & Communications Manager
Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, OASPA
http://oaspa.org/
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
