ЦЕР - Централни Репозиторијум ИХТМ-а
Институт за хемију, технологију и металургију
    • English
    • Српски
    • Српски (Serbia)
  • Српски (ћирилица) 
    • Енглески
    • Српски (ћирилица)
    • Српски (латиница)
  • Пријава
Преглед рада 
  •   ЦЕР - Централни репозиторијум ИХТМ-а
  • IHTM
  • Radovi istraživača / Researchers' publications
  • Преглед рада
  •   ЦЕР - Централни репозиторијум ИХТМ-а
  • IHTM
  • Radovi istraživača / Researchers' publications
  • Преглед рада
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Peer-review process in journals dealing with chemistry and related subjects published in Serbia

Thumbnail
2016
2049.pdf (1.026Mb)
Аутори
Dekanski, Aleksandar
Drvenica, Ivana
Nedić, Olgica
Чланак у часопису (Објављена верзија)
Метаподаци
Приказ свих података о документу
Апстракт
A survey was conducted among editors of journals publishing in the field of chemistry, chemical technology and related topics in Serbia, aiming to collect information on their experience, problems and difficulties during peer-review process. Editors from 22 journals out of 27 that regularly published during 2015 replied. General data on journals were collected from responses obtained from editors-in-chief, whereas all editors (including sub-editors and section editors) participated in a questionnaire concerning peer-review procedure. Additionally, they were asked to evaluate quality of reports and attitude of reviewers, discuss present situation and suggest measures to improve peer-review process. The greatest problems encountered by editors in peer-review process can be summarized as follows: low rate of acceptance to review, low quality of reports, sometimes due to the reviewer's bias or their inability to properly understand the review process. A method used to search for reviewers ...does not substantially influence the quality of reports. Editors agree that introduction of On-Line processes and creation of precise instructions for reviewers, education of potential reviewers, as well as social, public and professional recognition and appreciation of reviewers' work, are the most important measures to improve the quality of the peer-review process and, consecutively, the quality of published articles and journals.

Кључне речи:
scientific publishing / search for reviewers / quality of peer-review reports / on-line processing of papers
Извор:
Chemical Industry and Chemical Engineering Quarterly / CICEQ, 2016, 22, 4, 491-501
Издавач:
  • Association of the Chemical Engineers of Serbia

DOI: 10.2298/CICEQ160328033D

ISSN: 1451-9372

WoS: 000392923800013

Scopus: 2-s2.0-85009212491
[ Google Scholar ]
2
2
URI
http://cer.ihtm.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/2051
Колекције
  • Radovi istraživača / Researchers' publications
Институција
IHTM
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Dekanski, Aleksandar
AU  - Drvenica, Ivana
AU  - Nedić, Olgica
PY  - 2016
UR  - http://cer.ihtm.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/2051
AB  - A survey was conducted among editors of journals publishing in the field of chemistry, chemical technology and related topics in Serbia, aiming to collect information on their experience, problems and difficulties during peer-review process. Editors from 22 journals out of 27 that regularly published during 2015 replied. General data on journals were collected from responses obtained from editors-in-chief, whereas all editors (including sub-editors and section editors) participated in a questionnaire concerning peer-review procedure. Additionally, they were asked to evaluate quality of reports and attitude of reviewers, discuss present situation and suggest measures to improve peer-review process. The greatest problems encountered by editors in peer-review process can be summarized as follows: low rate of acceptance to review, low quality of reports, sometimes due to the reviewer's bias or their inability to properly understand the review process. A method used to search for reviewers does not substantially influence the quality of reports. Editors agree that introduction of On-Line processes and creation of precise instructions for reviewers, education of potential reviewers, as well as social, public and professional recognition and appreciation of reviewers' work, are the most important measures to improve the quality of the peer-review process and, consecutively, the quality of published articles and journals.
PB  - Association of the Chemical Engineers of Serbia
T2  - Chemical Industry and Chemical Engineering Quarterly / CICEQ
T1  - Peer-review process in journals dealing with chemistry and related subjects published in Serbia
VL  - 22
IS  - 4
SP  - 491
EP  - 501
DO  - 10.2298/CICEQ160328033D
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Dekanski, Aleksandar and Drvenica, Ivana and Nedić, Olgica",
year = "2016",
url = "http://cer.ihtm.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/2051",
abstract = "A survey was conducted among editors of journals publishing in the field of chemistry, chemical technology and related topics in Serbia, aiming to collect information on their experience, problems and difficulties during peer-review process. Editors from 22 journals out of 27 that regularly published during 2015 replied. General data on journals were collected from responses obtained from editors-in-chief, whereas all editors (including sub-editors and section editors) participated in a questionnaire concerning peer-review procedure. Additionally, they were asked to evaluate quality of reports and attitude of reviewers, discuss present situation and suggest measures to improve peer-review process. The greatest problems encountered by editors in peer-review process can be summarized as follows: low rate of acceptance to review, low quality of reports, sometimes due to the reviewer's bias or their inability to properly understand the review process. A method used to search for reviewers does not substantially influence the quality of reports. Editors agree that introduction of On-Line processes and creation of precise instructions for reviewers, education of potential reviewers, as well as social, public and professional recognition and appreciation of reviewers' work, are the most important measures to improve the quality of the peer-review process and, consecutively, the quality of published articles and journals.",
publisher = "Association of the Chemical Engineers of Serbia",
journal = "Chemical Industry and Chemical Engineering Quarterly / CICEQ",
title = "Peer-review process in journals dealing with chemistry and related subjects published in Serbia",
volume = "22",
number = "4",
pages = "491-501",
doi = "10.2298/CICEQ160328033D"
}
Dekanski A, Drvenica I, Nedić O. Peer-review process in journals dealing with chemistry and related subjects published in Serbia. Chemical Industry and Chemical Engineering Quarterly / CICEQ. 2016;22(4):491-501
Dekanski, A., Drvenica, I.,& Nedić, O. (2016). Peer-review process in journals dealing with chemistry and related subjects published in Serbia.
Chemical Industry and Chemical Engineering Quarterly / CICEQAssociation of the Chemical Engineers of Serbia., 22(4), 491-501.
https://doi.org/10.2298/CICEQ160328033D
Dekanski Aleksandar, Drvenica Ivana, Nedić Olgica, "Peer-review process in journals dealing with chemistry and related subjects published in Serbia" 22, no. 4 (2016):491-501,
https://doi.org/10.2298/CICEQ160328033D .

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
О Централном репозиторијуму (ЦеР) | Пошаљите запажања

OpenAIRERCUB
 

 

Комплетан репозиторијумИнституцијеАуториНасловиТемеОва институцијаАуториНасловиТеме

Статистика

Преглед статистика

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
О Централном репозиторијуму (ЦеР) | Пошаљите запажања

OpenAIRERCUB