Peer Review Ethics in Iranian Scientific Journals: Evidence-Based Case Study of the Journal of Information Processing and Management (JIPM)

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

Rajabali Beglou Reza; Seghatoleslami Alireza; Rajabali Beglou Zahra

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

Journal: Iranian Journal of Information Processing & Management Year:621 | Volume: | Issue: Page(s): 205-229

Download Full-Text

View:

Download:

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

Peer Review Ethics in Iranian Scientific Journals: Evidence-Based Case Study of the Journal of Information Processing and Management (JIPM)

Author(s)

Rajabali Beglou Reza | Seghatoleslami Alireza | Rajabali Beglou Zahra | Issue Writer Certificate

Keywords

Peer Review Ethics (PRE)Q4

Peer reviewersQ4

scientific journalsQ4

Journal of Information Processing and Management (JIPM)Q4

IranQ4

Abstract

The present study investigates Peer Review Ethics (PRE) in scientific journals in Iran, specifically to compile the PRE statement for the Journal of Information Processing and Management (JIPM). Moreover, PRE statements of the Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology (MSRT) journals were analyzed qualitatively. Then, the review process and the documents of the JIPM were analyzed. This evidence-based case study was conducted using a mixed method with three types of researchers-based, data-based, and research-based methods and focus group discussion (FGD) to validate the research findings. The findings showed that PRE elements were classified into "timeliness," "confidentiality," "bias," "conflict of interest," "research misconduct," "respectful and fair expressions," "constructive and objective feedback," and "accountability and responsibility" categories. The analysis of ethical statements of MSRT journals found that only half of the journals published PRE statements. In addition, 102 instances of violations of PRE with 15% of each review were identified in documents submitted for review in JIPM.

Cites

No record.

References

No record.

Cite

Related Journal Papers

No record.

Related Seminar Papers

No record.

Related Plans

No record.

Recommended Workshops