Abstract:

The arbitration system, which is an important instrument of academic processes, is not only considered indispensable for determining the suitableness of academic studies for publication, but also for its effective role in evaluating research scholarships and academic position applications and promotional requests. However, in recent years, the system that becomes the subject of academic studies itself is being criticized from various aspects, studies are being conducted which show that the authors and judges have errors related to their qualities, and alternatives are being sought to be resolved. In this study, the faculties of economic and administrative sciences and political information issued, the magazines that are within the framework of the TR Dizin and published the application and admission dates of articles in the last three years, and the conclusion was that the average admission period of articles did not differ according to the language of writing, the number of authors, the title of authors, the gender and whether they were a member of a university. On the other hand, large differences have been observed in the average reception periods of similar-quality magazines published in the same area. More importantly, the fact that the writers are members of the university that publishes the magazine can significantly shorten the entry periods of the article. This situation means that in the stages of the double-blind arbitration process, the editors make significant errors, that some authors are chosen to make errors for their articles, or that the editors communicate with the editors in a way that will affect the process.

Abstract:

The peer-review system as a critical tool in academic processes is regarded to be essential. It is not used only to evaluate the manuscripts submitted to the journals but also in tenure decisions, academic promotions, and grant applications. However, during the last few decades, the system has also become a subject of academic research and criticized from various aspects. Many scholars studied the process and presented biases emerging due to the characteristics of the authors and reviewers. In this paper, the journals published by the faculties of economics and administrative sciences and the faculties of political sciences and indexed by TR Dizin are studied. It is observed that the language of the article, number, title, gender, and institutional affiliation of the authors do not influence the acceptance period. However, there is a difference between the average acceptance periods of the journals, which are quite similar. Moreover, being a faculty member of the publisher provides a significantly shorter acceptance period on average. The reason for such differentiation may be either the existence of a considerable extent of bias at the editorial stages of the process or the communication of the editors with the reviewers in a way that influences the process.

Keywords: