Date of Award
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.
The purpose of the present investigation was to study the peer review process in the Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology/Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology (JCN/JCEN). Interrater reliability between two independent reviewers regarding the decision of whether or not a manuscript should be published was analyzed, as well as the rates of agreement between the reviewer's recommendations and the final editorial decision. Reviewer reliability on the recommendation for publication fell within the low range for acceptable intraclass correlation coefficient values. Reviewers agreed more often on the recommendation to reject a manuscript than on the decision to accept a manuscript. The editors were equally likely to accept a manuscript that both reviewers agreed should be accepted as they were to reject a manuscript that both reviewers agreed should be rejected. The variables that served as the best predictors of subsequent publication were overall significance, conclusions, methodology, and data analysis. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)Dept. of Psychology. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis1991 .W389. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 31-01, page: 0441. Thesis (M.A.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 1991.
Wass, Peter J., "Analysis of the peer review process in neuropsychological journals." (1991). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 1178.