[Journal] Re: question on OSGeo Journal

[Micha Silver]

Hello Dan (and Dan...)
Thanks for clearing that up.
I'm quite happy now with the review procedure (and a bit better informed 
as well).

Cheers,
Micha


Dan Putler wrote:

> Hi Micha,
>
> What Dan has laid out is very consistent with the way most academic  
> journals are run. The listing of submitted articles results in what  
> is known as a "single blind" review process (where the reviewers know  
> who the authors of the paper are). This is common in some  
> disciplines. In others, "double blind" review processes are the norm  
> (where neither the reviewers or the authors know who one another  
> are). The double blind process is intended to reduce gaming behavior  
> on the part of reviewers. Having said this, there are always  
> potential conflict of interest issues. This is the reason why papers  
> go to multiple reviewers, with no single reviewer having control over  
> the process. This brings up the question of how many reviewers should  
> the paper be sent to? In the leading academic marketing journals, the  
> number of reviewers a paper is sent to has increased from three to  
> four over the last ten years. I think one of the reasons that editors  
> have done this is to mitigate reviewer conflict of interest problems.  
> In general, minimum qualifications for reviewers are determined by  
> the editor (or the associate editor in this case). The letter to a  
> reviewer that accompanies a submission will typically ask the  
> reviewer to return the paper if they feel they are not qualified to  
> review it. In talking to editors, there is more of a problem of  
> reviewers disqualifying themselves in cases where they shouldn't,  
> then in not disqualifying themselves in cases where they should. Over  
> time, editors tend to develop a list of reviewers they rely on based  
> on the quality and timeliness of past reviews done by that reviewer.
>
> Dan
>
> On 26-May-07, at 5:07 AM, Micha Silver wrote:
>
>> Hello Dan:
>>
>>
>> Daniel Ames wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> As for the review process for OSGeo Journal, I've just posted a  
>>> proposed plan for a peer review process on the wiki here: http:// 
>>> wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/Talk:Journal
>>>
>> Your proposal looks quite thorough. I'm in a bit over my head here,  
>> since I never had to go thru this process. So take my comments with  
>> a several grains of salt. Still, some questions that came to mind:
>> Should some minimum requirements for someone to be a reviewer be  
>> mentioned?
>> Is it necessary at this stage to add come clause to safeguard  
>> against conflict of interests?
>> As usual, it will be difficult to build and maintain a corps of  
>> volunteer reviewers. Nevertheless, I gather from your outline of  the 
>> review process that at least two reviewers will be required for  each 
>> article that requests peer review?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Micha
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> newsletter mailing list
>> newsletter at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/newsletter
>
>
>
>
>
> This mail was sent via Kinneret Mail-SeCure System.
>
>


-- 
Micha Silver
Arava Development Co
+972-8-6592270