How peer-review can help graphology
Nigel Bradley · WestminsterResearch (University of Westminster) · 2001
Questa pagina è anche in italiano Ce site est aussi en francais Cite as: Bradley N (2001) How Peer-Review can help graphology Graphology, (October) 58 pp [31][32][33] Available at http://www.wmin.ac.uk/marketingresearch/graphology/2062preng.htmGraphology has been criticised in numerous ways over the years.These criticisms have included the observation that there are "relatively few publications in respectable, refereed scientific journals that support graphology" (Beyerstein 1992:192).This comment is sealed with a later footnote: "Even fewer of the published studies favouring graphology are found in the highest quality journals with the most stringent peer-review standards and which do not charge authors for publication" (Beyerstein 1992:198).This criticism can be removed by understanding the nature of peer-review and the double blind referee mechanism.Existing graphological journals can be easily adapted to incorporate this 'quality control'.In addition to this, supporters of the subject should submit manuscripts to the non-graphological journals which are held in high esteem by such critics.Most academic subjects which are taught today have accompanying resources, these include the journals that allow academics and practitioners to keep their knowledge up-to-date.The "respectable" and "highest quality" journals are subject to peer review, which in many cases is double-blind.This means that an editor will send a manuscript to two or more "reviewers" for their comments.The identity of the author will be withheld from the reviewers, so the review is "blind".The reviewers are chosen by the editor from his or her network to be the most suitable for the particular articles.So for example, if the topic concerns Freud -the reviewers must be well-versed in Freudian Psychology, if the topic concerns mathematicsmathematicians will be chosen.Reviewers are required to answer various questions which 'grade' the article, and to provide open-ended comments.The editor is likely to return these comments to the original author/s, and may request that the article is modified.The reviewers' identities remain confidential throughout.In some cases editors do not submit an article to reviewers, and reject it outright, they do not want to waste their reviewers' time and goodwill.Reviewers are normally unpaid.Their motivations to do the job include prestige of working in the field, appearing on the Editorial Listing, receiving a free subscription, being privileged to read 'State-of-the-art' research and so forth.In reality the editor's own leadership qualities determine the nature of the review team and subsequently the overall 'quality' of the journal being published.