They Rejected My Paper: Why?

This article critically examines biases in the peer review process, essential for maintaining academic scholarship’s integrity. Despite its pivotal role, the peer review system is susceptible to various biases, including gender, institutional, confirmation, publication, and reviewer biases. These bi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Scholarly Publishing
Main Author: Dah J.; Hussin N.; Shahibi M.S.; Helda L.I.; Ametefe D.S.; Aliu A.A.; Ametefe G.D.
Format: Review
Language:English
Published: University of Toronto Press 2024
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85210996395&doi=10.3138%2fjsp-2024-0023&partnerID=40&md5=7b54c6b63c2c8391d7b5d322ac96e07d
id 2-s2.0-85210996395
spelling 2-s2.0-85210996395
Dah J.; Hussin N.; Shahibi M.S.; Helda L.I.; Ametefe D.S.; Aliu A.A.; Ametefe G.D.
They Rejected My Paper: Why?
2024
Journal of Scholarly Publishing
55
4
10.3138/jsp-2024-0023
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85210996395&doi=10.3138%2fjsp-2024-0023&partnerID=40&md5=7b54c6b63c2c8391d7b5d322ac96e07d
This article critically examines biases in the peer review process, essential for maintaining academic scholarship’s integrity. Despite its pivotal role, the peer review system is susceptible to various biases, including gender, institutional, confirmation, publication, and reviewer biases. These biases can undermine the objectivity and fairness of the academic publishing process, skewing the representation of research and the dissemination of scientific knowledge. Through a comprehensive literature review, the study explores these biases’ implications on the credibility of individual studies and the broader scientific discourse. The article proposes several solutions to address these issues, including adopting double-blind reviews, diversifying reviewer pools, enhancing transparency in editorial decisions, and promoting ethical standards in peer review. While recognizing the difficulty of completely eliminating biases, the paper emphasizes the importance of continued efforts to minimize their impact, striving for a more equitable, transparent, and rigorous scholarly ecosystem. © University of Toronto Press, 2024.
University of Toronto Press
11989742
English
Review

author Dah J.; Hussin N.; Shahibi M.S.; Helda L.I.; Ametefe D.S.; Aliu A.A.; Ametefe G.D.
spellingShingle Dah J.; Hussin N.; Shahibi M.S.; Helda L.I.; Ametefe D.S.; Aliu A.A.; Ametefe G.D.
They Rejected My Paper: Why?
author_facet Dah J.; Hussin N.; Shahibi M.S.; Helda L.I.; Ametefe D.S.; Aliu A.A.; Ametefe G.D.
author_sort Dah J.; Hussin N.; Shahibi M.S.; Helda L.I.; Ametefe D.S.; Aliu A.A.; Ametefe G.D.
title They Rejected My Paper: Why?
title_short They Rejected My Paper: Why?
title_full They Rejected My Paper: Why?
title_fullStr They Rejected My Paper: Why?
title_full_unstemmed They Rejected My Paper: Why?
title_sort They Rejected My Paper: Why?
publishDate 2024
container_title Journal of Scholarly Publishing
container_volume 55
container_issue 4
doi_str_mv 10.3138/jsp-2024-0023
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85210996395&doi=10.3138%2fjsp-2024-0023&partnerID=40&md5=7b54c6b63c2c8391d7b5d322ac96e07d
description This article critically examines biases in the peer review process, essential for maintaining academic scholarship’s integrity. Despite its pivotal role, the peer review system is susceptible to various biases, including gender, institutional, confirmation, publication, and reviewer biases. These biases can undermine the objectivity and fairness of the academic publishing process, skewing the representation of research and the dissemination of scientific knowledge. Through a comprehensive literature review, the study explores these biases’ implications on the credibility of individual studies and the broader scientific discourse. The article proposes several solutions to address these issues, including adopting double-blind reviews, diversifying reviewer pools, enhancing transparency in editorial decisions, and promoting ethical standards in peer review. While recognizing the difficulty of completely eliminating biases, the paper emphasizes the importance of continued efforts to minimize their impact, striving for a more equitable, transparent, and rigorous scholarly ecosystem. © University of Toronto Press, 2024.
publisher University of Toronto Press
issn 11989742
language English
format Review
accesstype
record_format scopus
collection Scopus
_version_ 1820775431908884480