Utilize este identificador para referenciar este registo: http://hdl.handle.net/10071/29680
Registo completo
Campo DCValorIdioma
dc.contributor.authorHorta, H.-
dc.contributor.authorSantos, J. M.-
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-21T10:46:23Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.citationHorta, H., & Santos, J. M. (2023). Determinants of peer review engagement and quality in scientific journals: Insights for academic research and the sustainability of the peer-review system. Studies in Higher Education. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2270488-
dc.identifier.issn0307-5079-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/29680-
dc.description.abstractResearch productivity is a common topic in the literature, but peer reviewing for journals has received less attention, although it is a key activity of academic research. We help to fill this knowledge gap by assessing the determinants of peer review engagement and quality in scientific journals. We do so by analysing the combined information from a survey of academics working in different parts of the world and various fields of science, along with their publication and peer review information gathered from Scopus and Publons/Web of Science. We find that age, gender, and some dimensions of academics’ strategic research agendas are important predictors of peer review engagement. We also find that academic inbreeding along the educational path has a negative association with the quality of peer-review activities. However, we find no statistically significant results concerning academic inbreeding related to the professional trajectory and peer review engagement and quality. Equally importantly, our results suggest that although the activities of publishing and peer reviewing are closely associated, peer review tends to be ancillary to publishing, rather than the other way around. Furthermore, the greater the perceived availability of resources, including research funding throughout an academic’s career, the greater the focus is on publishing and the less the focus is on peer reviewing. These findings are discussed in relation to the current valuation of publication versus peer reviewing in terms of scientific and academic career recognition.eng
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.publisherTaylor and Francis-
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/CEEC IND 3ed/2020.03729.CEECIND%2FCP1624%2FCT0004/PT-
dc.relation17602223-
dc.rightsembargoedAccess-
dc.subjectPeer review–publication nexuseng
dc.subjectStrategic research agendaseng
dc.subjectAcademic researcheng
dc.subjectAcademic inbreedingeng
dc.subjectPeer revieweng
dc.titleDeterminants of peer review engagement and quality in scientific journals: Insights for academic research and the sustainability of the peer-review systemeng
dc.typearticle-
dc.peerreviewedyes-
dc.volumeN/A-
dc.date.updated2023-11-21T10:45:29Z-
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion-
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/03075079.2023.2270488-
dc.subject.fosDomínio/Área Científica::Ciências Sociais::Ciências da Educaçãopor
dc.date.embargo2025-04-17-
iscte.identifier.cienciahttps://ciencia.iscte-iul.pt/id/ci-pub-98347-
iscte.alternateIdentifiers.wosWOS:001087368600001-
iscte.alternateIdentifiers.scopus2-s2.0-85174415136-
iscte.journalStudies in Higher Education-
Aparece nas coleções:CIES-RI - Artigos em revistas científicas internacionais com arbitragem científica

Ficheiros deste registo:
Ficheiro TamanhoFormato 
article_98347.pdf
  Restricted Access
382,59 kBAdobe PDFVer/Abrir Request a copy


FacebookTwitterDeliciousLinkedInDiggGoogle BookmarksMySpaceOrkut
Formato BibTex mendeley Endnote Logotipo do DeGóis Logotipo do Orcid 

Todos os registos no repositório estão protegidos por leis de copyright, com todos os direitos reservados.