Read this article now - Try Goliath Business News - FREE!   
You can view this article PLUS...

• Over 5 million business articles
• Hundreds of the most trusted magazines, newswires, and journals (see list)
• Premium business information that is timely and relevant
• Unlimited Access

Tell Me More   Terms and Conditions

Purchase this article for $4.95

...1976; Pardeck, 1992; Pardeck & Meinert, 1999; Thyer & Polk, 1997); (2) quality and reliability of manuscript reviews (Epstein, 1990, 2004; Kirk & Franke, 1997); (3) assessment of confirmational response bias to determine if reviewers and editors are more likely to accept studies reporting positive outcomes than negative ones (Epstein, 1990, 2004); (4) impact of journals on the field (Lindsey & Kirk, 1992); and, (5) decision making and editorial practices used by journals (Thyer & Myers, 2003).

Results from the aforementioned studies reveal modest scholarly records among many journal editorial board members, considerable levels of variation in the quality and reliability of manuscript reviews, mixed findings pertaining to the presence of conformational response bias, low impact scores for many journals, and perceived inefficiencies in review practices. In addition, these studies have been the subject of frequent and lively debate in the social work literature. Pardeck's (1992) findings, for example, yielded seven different responses from leading journal editors in a 1992 issue of Research on Social Work Practice.

Calls for reform in scholarly journals have been made recently by active editors and board members of prominent social work publications. In 2005 alone the editors-in-chief of Social Work (Marsh, 2005) and the Journal of Social Work Education (Valentine, 2005) identified strategies to improve the efficiency and the transparency of their respective journal's manuscript review practices. The attention currently directed to the discussion of social work journal publications affords a unique opportunity to improve the professions core dissemination outlets.

This issue of Social Work Research aims to further the current discussion of quality in social work journals by printing a statement attributed to a group of scholars attending the 2005 conference of the Society for Social Work and Research. The authors of this statement participated in a conference roundtable discussion of social work journal publication practices and quality. The resultant "Miami Statement" identifies key concerns and offers recommendations to improve the efficiency and quality of publications in social work. Among the group's major concerns are issues associated with the limited impact of social work journals, the poor quality of manuscript reviews, the slow pace of review and publication, and lack of leadership in journal publication.

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF JOURNAL PUBLICATION

The problems and pursuant recommendations found in the Miami Statement should be seriously considered by the profession. Encouragingly, some of the recommendations outlined...

NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.



More articles from Social Work Research
Relevant books received., June 01, 2005
Correction.(Correction Notice), June 01, 2005

Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.

Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication name or publication date.

About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company analysis or best practices in managing your organization, Goliath can help you meet your business needs.

Our extensive business information databases empower business professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible, authoritative information they need to support their business goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting, company research or defining management best practices - Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.