The limited effectiveness of prestige as an intervention on the health of medical journal publications

Episteme 10 (4):387-402 (2013)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Under the traditional system of peer-reviewed publication, the degree of prestige conferred to authors by successful publication is tied to the degree of the intellectual rigor of its peer review process: ambitious scientists do well professionally by doing well epistemically. As a result, we should expect journal editors, in their dual role as epistemic evaluators and prestige-allocators, to have the power to motivate improved author behavior through the tightening of publication requirements. Contrary to this expectation, I will argue that the publication bias literature in academic medicine demonstrates that editor interventions have had limited effectiveness in improving the health of the publication and trial registration record, suggesting that much stronger interventions are needed.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LEETLE
Revision history
Archival date: 2013-11-13
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Bias in Peer Review.Lee, Carole J.; Sugimoto, Cassidy R.; Zhang, Guo & Cronin, Blaise

View all 21 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Is Peer Review a Good Idea?Heesen, Remco & Bright, Liam Kofi

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2013-11-13

Total views
205 ( #17,152 of 43,688 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
56 ( #12,513 of 43,688 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.