Philosophy Journal Practices and Opportunities for Bias

Periodical TitleAPA Newsletter on Feminism and Philosophy
Author(s)Carole J. Lee; Christian D. Schunn
Editor(s)Christina M. Bellon
AbstractThis article examines journal practices and opportunities for bias in philosophy publishing through a 2009 survey sent to 25 journals (n=17). Journals report high rejection rates (92%). While 90% of editors mask author identities from reviewers, 81% of journals do not shield author identities from editors, allowing for the possibility of social bias in editorial decisions. 63% of editors sometimes rely on single reviews. 40% of editors “never” or “rarely” accept a paper receiving a single negative review (of these, 80% report sometimes relying on a single review). The authors recommend triple-anonymous review, increased reviewer numbers, and APA involvement in establishing best-practice standards and systematic data collection on submission and acceptance rates, including by gender and race.
This content was generated by artificial intelligence using the text of the original work and reviewed by the author.
Pages5-10
Volume10
Issue1
Keywordsphilosophy journals, peer review, gender bias, anonymous review, desk rejection, publishing practices, evaluation bias, cognitive schemas, professional standards, academic publishing
This content was generated by artificial intelligence using the text of the original work and reviewed by the author.
Date PublishedFall 2010
ISBN/ISSN2155-9708
URLhttps://cdn.ymaws.com/www.apaonline.org/resource/collection/D03EBDAB-82D7-4B28-B897-C050FDC1ACB4/v10n1Feminism.pdf
Open Access?Yes

Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.