Abstract
This study attempted to find out the challenges that Arab peer-reviewers face in reviewing journal articles, the time given for finishing the review, following up the reviewers, the evaluation criteria, decision-making, accepting and rejecting articles, and pressures imposed on the reviewers. Forty Arab peer reviewers responded to a survey with open-ended questions. The responses were sorted out and classified according to 10 categories. The most common problems facing reviewers can be summarized as follows: papers sent for review have linguistic and methodological weaknesses. The evaluation standards/benchmarks vary from one periodical to another and from one institution to another. The reviewers vary in efficiency experience, caliber, and meticulousness. The majority of reviewers are lenient and have an inadequate background in their field. The amount of time taken in the review and publishing process is long. Some journals do not state clearly the reviewing and publishing policies, do not have an evaluation form, do not mention the characteristics and percentage of accepted research articles to authors, reviewers, and the public, the areas of specializations covered by the journal, and have a limited number of specialized and qualified reviewers. Some recommendations for overcoming those challenges are given.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Arts and Humanities Studies
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
