How to review scientific journals
How to review scientific journals which will be presented here is summarized from Zambrut's explanation of how to organize a journal review. Zambrut is one of the largest academic journal publishers. This institution also houses an international journal indexation service with the most databases.
Some practical steps related to how to review journals need to be known by students, lecturers, teachers, practitioners and academics whose work is related to the production and writing of scientific journals. Journal review is one of the activities that is quite commonly done, both institutionally, namely as a member of an institution's peer review or informally, which is as part of the process of writing journal articles.
This post will discuss about how to review academic journals by assuming the reader as a reviewer who is carrying out the task of reviewing journal manuscripts sent by the journal editor.
In short, the reader here is positioned as a member of peer review. Before proceeding with the explanation, some important points need to be considered by the reader when accepting an invitation to review journal articles from the editor.
how to review journals First, the reader must ask whether the manuscript requested to be reviewed corresponds to your area of expertise or expertise? Strive for you to accept a review assignment if you feel you can produce a quality review.
Second, the reader must ensure that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the tasks assigned by the editor. If there is, you must submit your paper it in advance to the editor who sent the manuscript.
Third, make sure you have time to do it. Producing quality journal reviews requires a lot of time. Not all reviewers receive financial compensation for the task.
How to review journals
Before starting to review, the reader must treat the manuscript sent by the editor as a confidential document. This means that the manuscript of the article may not be shared with others without the approval of the editor or an authorized party.
When you have received the manuscript, read the article and then take a short break to think, ponder, and reflect on what you just read. Not all words must be read, but of course reading the entire script will be very helpful. After reading the article, look back at what you have read from the scientific perspective or the expertise you have.
Keep in mind that the results of your review will help the journal editor to decide whether the manuscript is suitable for publication or not. Therefore the reviewer must provide an overall opinion of the text.
Pointing out the shortcomings of the article script is very necessary and constructive comments are highly recommended. It should also be noted that personal information about you, including names, may not be included in order to maintain the objectivity of the review process.
Next, I will describe some practical steps on how to review academic journals that can be taken by reviewers, especially novice reviewers.
Practical steps for reviewing journals
◊ First, summarize the text of the article reviewed in brief paragraphs. Two or three short paragraphs are enough. This step is done to show the editor that the reviewer has read and understood the contents of the manuscript.
◊ Second, give your impression of the article, including whether the article is actual, the issue discussed is interesting, and has an influence on the development of science in its field.
◊ Third, provide your comments on whether the article meets national or international journal standards. Some criteria need to be explained whether it meets or not.
◊ Fourth, provide comments and suggestions regarding the structure and substance of the article, including the format and layout, title, abstract, introduction, method, results, conclusions or discussion, the language used, and references.
◊ Fifth, if there are indications related to plagiarism, conflicts of interest, and / or issues of code of ethics, submit it to the editor as part of the review.
Enam Sixth, if there is an indication of a high level of bias, including the validity and reliability of research results, reviewers must submit it to the editor because it will have a negative impact on the quality of the publishing journal.
Ujuh Seventh, as mentioned earlier, the reviewer must treat the article as a confidential document. This applies both before, during and after the publication process.
Elapan Eighth, every comment and suggestion written must be based on scientific reasons rather than an attempt to "find face" before the editor.
◊ Ninth, when making recommendations for editors, pay close attention to three important criteria, namely the manuscript is rejected, accepted without revision, or accepted with revisions both minor and major. If accepted with a revision, explain which parts need to be revised by the author.
The nine steps are a general process that is implemented as part of a way to review academic journals. The next decision of the fate of the manuscript after being reviewed is in the hands of the journal editor. Reviewers here are tasked with "assisting editors" in the manuscript review corridor.
Scientific Journal: Definition, Process of Publication & Example
Scientific journals are published as a means or media for the dissemination of research results in certain disciplines or subdisciplines. Scientific journal publications are generally in the form of articles including research reports, literature reviews, proposals on untested theories or opinion articles. The form of the published article depends very much on the policy of the journal institution itself or the journal publisher.
Articles written in scientific journals are produced by individuals in the scientific community. The scientific community can consist of students, teachers, lecturers, researchers, professors, journalists and so on. Writing the article can be done individually or collectively. In general we already know that articles written must be scientific, meaning that they are produced through a research process that applies scientific methods.
This post will briefly discuss the understanding of scientific journals, how journals are published, and what their examples are like. I suggest readers to position this post as an introduction to what is a journal as we often hear the term in the academic world. We begin the discussion from the definition.
Definition of scientific journals
scientific journals Scientific journals are often called academic journals. In English it is translated as 'scientific journal' or 'academic journal'. Academic journals can be described as a collection of scientific articles that are published regularly in order to disseminate research results. Disseminated research results often challenge general assumptions that circulate among the public or challenge (critique) the findings of previous research. Dissemination results can also display new data in the academic literature.
Academic journals are always specific, meaning that they are written in the perspective of certain disciplines or disciplines. In other words, represent specialization in certain scientific fields. For example, a journal called 'Acta Sociologica', is an academic journal in the discipline of sociology. To get a clearer picture of what a scientific journal is, we need to know how the process of publishing an academic journal.
The process of publishing scientific journals
We first imagine that there is a scientific community that forms associations. I will explain through examples as 'props' only. Suppose there is a scientific association called Pop Culture Studies. The association agreed to make a scientific journal that focuses on the phenomenon of pop culture from an anthropological perspective. The journal was given the name 'Zambrut Journal'. Pop Studies culture does not happen to have its own publishing agency, so they publish their journals in existing publishers. The publisher for example is named 'LIPII'.
Here we see that Pop Culture Culture wants to publish a journal called 'Zambrut Journal' published by LIPII. Then, how is the journal published? The process is actually similar to other article publications. It's just that the value highlighted is the scientific value and its contribution to the academic field and / or public policy.
To publish the 'Zambrut Journal' Journal, we (the authors) send manuscripts (manuscript articles) to the Zambrut Journal. The writer can be anyone but the editor and revealer of the Zambrut Journal. The manuscript, of course, must be related to the study of pop culture. Once written, the manuscript is received by the Editor Zambrut Journal, then collected and sent to reviewers of the Zambrut Journal journal, which usually consists of experts. Delivery to reviewers continues with the peer-review process.
What is peer-reviewed? Peer-review is the process by which two or more experts related to the topic we write evaluate our manuscript at the request of a journal editor. Reviewers carefully give judgments based on their expertise. This assessment will determine whether our manuscript is suitable for publication, needs revision, or is not suitable for publication.
Often the review process involves circulating manuscripts between reviewers. It is important to know that the manuscripts that arrive at the reviewer are usually anonymous. That is, the name of the author and the author's institution have been temporarily removed to avoid bias or subjectivity in judgment. Reviewers themselves are also usually anonymous so that the writer can maintain his objectivity when accepting the results of the review.
After the evaluation or review process is complete, the reviewer sends the manuscript along with the results of his evaluation to the journal editor. The results of the evaluation generally take the form of comments and criticisms of the writing, including the strengths and weaknesses substantively and technically. The editor reads the reviewers' comments to consider whether the manuscript (article) is worthy of publication, needs to be revised or rejected.
One question that often arises is about payment. Does the reviewer receive financial compensation for his services? This depends on the institution of the journal. If the Pop Studies Cultural Association budgeted a fee for the reviewer, the reviewer would get paid for his services. Like reviewers, writers too. Some writers get paid, some don't. In fact there are also writers who must pay when the article is published.
Another question that also often arises in the world of journalism is, does the content of journal articles reflect the position of the editor, journal management association, and journal publisher? The answer is no. Journal articles reflect the thoughts of their authors. Quite often journal publications are accompanied by a disclaimer that journal content does not represent the views of the journalists' associations and publishers.
Benefits of scientific journals
Some of the benefits that can be mentioned here include:
»As a means of developing knowledge. Scientific journals are the arena of intellectual discourse through writing. The development of science can be done with research findings, criticism of research findings, consensus building and new findings. The process continues. That's how science develops and journals play an important role as a means.
»As a public policy database. Public policy requires academic texts as its foundation. Journals can act as a scientific basis for making public policy. Without scientific basis, public policy can be said to be made arbitrarily.
Several other benefits can be mentioned both qualitatively and quantitatively. Quantitatively, for example the number of scientific journal publications is usually used as a benchmark for the progress of an institution or institution such as, a country, a university, a study center, and so forth.