Authors: Lutz Bornmann
Publish Date: 2011/11/01
Volume: 91, Issue: 3, Pages: 857-862
Abstract
Purpose—this paper aims to look at the Hawthorne effect in editorial peer review Design/methodology/approach—discusses the quality evaluation of refereed scholarly journals Findings—a key finding of this research was that in the peer review process of one and the same manuscript reviewers or editors respectively arrive at different judgments This phenomenon is named as “Hawthorne effect” because the different judgements are dependent on the specific conditions under which the peer review process at the individual journals takes place Originality/value—provides a discussion on the quality evaluation of scholarly journals
Keywords: