0000000000306426

AUTHOR

Mike Farjam

0000-0002-0882-4851

showing 2 related works from this author

Hidden connections: Network effects on editorial decisions in four computer science journals

2018

Abstract This paper aims to examine the influence of authors’ reputation on editorial bias in scholarly journals. By looking at eight years of editorial decisions in four computer science journals, including 7179 observations on 2913 submissions, we reconstructed author/referee-submission networks. For each submission, we looked at reviewer scores and estimated the reputation of submission authors by means of their network degree. By training a Bayesian network, we estimated the potential effect of scientist reputation on editorial decisions. Results showed that more reputed authors were less likely to be rejected by editors when they submitted papers receiving negative reviews. Although th…

Scope (project management)business.industrymedia_common.quotation_subject05 social sciencesPotential effectComputer Science Applications1707 Computer Vision and Pattern RecognitionNetwork effectsLibrary and Information SciencesPublic relations050905 science studiesPeer reviewComputer Science ApplicationsEditorial biasBayesian networkAuthor reputationIndividual dataAnnan samhällsvetenskapAuthor reputation; Bayesian network; Editorial bias; Network effects; Peer review; Computer Science Applications1707 Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition; Library and Information Sciences0509 other social sciences050904 information & library sciencesbusinessOther Social SciencesReputationmedia_commonJournal of Informetrics
researchProduct

No Tickets for Women in the COVID-19 Race? A Study on Manuscript Submissions and Reviews in 2347 Elsevier Journals during the Pandemic

2020

During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the submission rate to scholarly journals increased abnormally. Given that most academics were forced to work from home, the competing demands for familial duties might have penalised the scientific productivity of women. To test this hypothesis, we looked at submitted manuscripts and peer review activities for all Elsevier journals between February and May 2018-2020, including data on over 5 million authors and referees. Results showed that during the first wave of the pandemic, women submitted proportionally fewer manuscripts than men. This deficit was especially pronounced among younger cohorts of women academics. The rate of the peer-rev…

Race (biology)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Work from homePandemicGender biasPsychologyScientific productivityDemographyTest (assessment)SSRN Electronic Journal
researchProduct