Abstract

Peer review is the bedrock of the scientific enterprise, yet it enjoys scant validation. The federal government’s CrimeSolutions.gov initiative provides a unique opportunity to address this limitation. As part of the initiative, trained experts evaluate criminal justice evaluation research on several of the same criteria editors use to make publication decisions. Data from a sample of articles published in Social Sciences Citation Index journals were obtained from the CrimeSolutions.gov database, then used to model publication quality, operationalized as the product of the journal’s five-year impact factor and article citations per year (an article-level measure). The model explained only five percent of the variation in publication quality, raising several questions about the validity of peer review in criminal justice evaluation research.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call

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.