Science, politics, and peer review
An editors dilemma
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13348091 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ryan Mccarty (0000-0003-2737-0864, American Psychological Association, corresponding author), Richard Mccarty |
| Year | 2002 |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 198-201 |
| Publication date | 2002-03-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Psychologist (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0003-066X • E-ISSN: 1935-990X |
| Publisher | American Psychological Association (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1037/0003-066x.57.3.198 |
| PMID | 11905119 |
| OpenAlex | W2076937664 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 6 |
The American Psychologist is the official journal of the American Psychological Association. As such, it is a valued outlet for articles dealing with reviews of current topics in psychology, policy issues, and critiques of current research. S. O. Lilienfeld submitted a manuscript to the journal that was accepted by the ad hoc action editor; however, the action editor's decision was later overruled by the editor, and additional changes to the manuscript were requested. Because of this editorial decision, a controversy arose that played out on various Internet discussion groups. The author presents his perspective as the editor in this controversy. Points of emphasis include the need to protect the integrity and the confidentiality of the peer review process for scientific journals
Action (physics · Confidentiality · Dilemma · Engineering ethics · Epistemology · Peer review · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology · Computer Science · Counseling Practices and Supervision · Law · Psychology
| Citations per year | 0.17 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2002 - 2002 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |