Abstract
Several studies have demonstrated that such factors as area of specialization, and the age, rank, years of experience and prestige background of authors affect the publication of scientific research. This study examines the impact of these variables on the probability that published articles will receive critical comment. The data for the study are based on information gathered on the authors of 477 articles and comments published in theAmerican Sociological Review over a 33 year period (1947–1979). Results show that area of specialization is a major factor influencing the probability of an article being commented on. Articles written in the areas of theory/history of social thought and quantitative methods receive a disproportionately higher percentage of comments; while articles in such areas as community, social psychology and marriage and family receive far fewer comments. None of the five demographic and prestige characteristics of article authors was found to significantly discriminate between those articles that either had or had not been commented on. And finally, journal article comments are shown to either enhance or diminish an article's likelihood of later being cited, depending upon the speciality area in which that article is written.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
P. F. LAZARSFELD, W. THIELENS, Jr., The Academic Mind. Glencoe, Ill., The Free Press, 1958.
P. GOODMAN, The Community of Scholars, Random House, New York, 1962.
S. COLE, J. R. COLE, Social Stratification in Science, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1973.
H. RODMAN, The moral responsibility of journal editors and referees.The American Sociologist, 5 (1970) 351–357.
N. D. GLENN, The journal article review process: Some proposals for change,The American Sociologist, 11 (1976) 179–185.
D. LINDSEY, The Scientific Publication System in Social Science, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, California, 1978.
D. CRANE, The gatekeepers of science: Some factors affecting the selection of articles for scientific journals.The American Sociologist, 2 (1967) 195–201.
H. ZUCKERMAN, R. K. MERTON, Institutionalized Patterns of Evaluation in Science, p. 460–496, in: R. K. MERTON,Sociology of Science, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1973.
L. FREESE, On changing some relationships in the editorial review process,The American Sociologist, 14 (1979) 231–238.
W. E. SNIZEK, E. R. FUHRMAN, Some factors affecting the evaluative content of book reviews in sociology.The American Sociologist, 14 (1979) 108–114.
W. E. SNIZEK, E. R. FUHRMAN, M. R. WOOD, The effect of theory group association on the evaluative content of book reviews in sociology,The American Sociologist, 16 (1981) 185–195.
M. J. MAHONEY, Publications prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system,Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1 (1977) 161–175.
C. R. TITTLE, W. J. VILLEMEZ, D. A. SMITH, The myth of social class and criminality,American Sociological Review, 43 (1978) 643–656.
R. STARK, Whose status counts,American Sociological Review, 44 (1979) 668–669.
G. JASSO, On Gini's Mean Difference and Gini's Index of Concentration,American Sociological Review, 44 (1979) 867–876.
W. E. MOORE, A comment on “The scientific legitimization of fallacy”.American Sociological Review, 37 (1972) 376–377.
D. J. CHAMPION, M. F. MORRIS, A content analysis of book reviews in the AJS, ASR, and Social Forces,American Journal of Sociology, 78 (1973) 1256–1265.
R. K. MERTON,Sociology of Science, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1973.
D. CRANE, Scientists at major and minor universities,American Sociological Review, 30 (1965) 699–714.
T. CAPLOW, R. J. McGEE,The Academic Marketplace, Basic Books, New York, 1958.
B. BARBER, Resistance by scientists to scientific discovery,Science, 134 (1961) 596–602.
N. D. GLENN, American sociologists' evaluation of sixty-three journals,The American Sociologist, 6 (1971) 298–303.
A. M. CARTTER,An Assessment of Quality in Graduate Education, American Council on Education, Washington, D.C., 1966.
N. D. GLENN, W. VILLEMEZ, The productivity of sociologists at 45 American universities,The American Sociologist, 5 (1970) 244–252.
D. ROOSE, C. J. ANDERSEN,A Rating of Graduate Programs, American Council on Education, Washington, D. C., 1970.
R. B. STURGIS, F. CLEMENTE, The productivity of graduates of 50 sociology departments,The American Sociologist, 8 (1973) 169–180.
T. ROCHE, D. L. SMITH, Frequency of citations as criterion for the ranking of departments, journals and individuals,Sociological Inquiry, 48 (1978) 49–57.
The Social Science Citation Index 1966–1970 Five Year Cumulation. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information. 1971–1975 Five Year Cumulation. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information. 1976 Annual. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information. 1977 Annual. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information. 1978 Annual. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information. 1979 Annual. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information.
H. ZUCKERMAN,Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States, Free Press, New York, 1977.
N. D. GLENN, On the missue of book reviews,Contemporary Sociology, 7 (1978) 254–255.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Snizek, W.E., Dudley, C.J. & Hughes, J.E. The second process of peer review: Some correlates of comments published in the ASR (1947–1979). Scientometrics 4, 417–430 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02021138
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02021138