arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2112.09360cs.DL
收藏

在同行评议的持续时间中,显眼的稿件经历的时间更短吗?

Do conspicuous manuscripts experience shorter time in the duration of peer review?

Guangyao Zhang, Furong Shang, Weixi Xie, Yuhan Guo, Chunlin Jiang, Xianwen Wang

摘要:

作者经常问的一个问题是同行评审过程需要多长时间。同行评议的持续时间是近年来学者们关注的问题,也是学术界关注的热点。目前对这一领域的研究主要集中在一个单一的数量层面。很少有研究认为审稿时间长短与稿件的吸引力密切相关。本研究旨在利用注意力经济理论填补这一研究空白。通过对《英国医学杂志》(BMJ)的同行评议历史的分析,我们发现同行评议的持续时间与高度注意力得分(AAs)之间存在显著的负相关关系。总的来说,我们的研究有助于从一个新的角度理解同行评议行为,并弥合同行评议和altmetrics之间的鸿沟。

英文摘要:

A question often asked by authors is how long would it take for the peer review process. Peer review duration has been concerned much by authors and attracted much attention in academia these years. Existing research on this field focuses primarily on a single quantitative dimension. Seldom studies considered that peer review duration is closely related to the attractiveness of manuscripts. This study aims to fill this research gap employing attention economy theory. By analyzing the peer review history from the British Medical Journal (BMJ), we find that a significant negative relationship exists between the peer review duration and altmetric attention score (AAs). Overall, our study contributes to understanding peer review behavior from a new perspective and bridging the divide between peer reviews and altmetrics.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑