The judgement of Solomon and journal status.
Abstract: In the preceding 2 issues, March and May, editorials were presented
regarding the generality of peer review and the relationship of
authors to readership. In this issue, the outcome of peer review and
content of the Journal is considered as a logical end-point of
endeavours of authors and editors. Science is a hard taskmaster for
both of these participants; it is about what is; and not about what
would be nice, desirable or, even, applicable. The content of any
scientific Journal is presented in order to advance knowledge and is
thereby constrained by correspondingly strict disciplines of
accuracy and presentation of what can be taken as fact.
The means of ranking journals for the benefit of authors and
readers vary according to circumstances of the objectives of those
who make these judgements, be they readers, authors, clinicians,
academics or members of the public.
Publication Date: 2007-08-29 PubMed ID: 17722717DOI: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2007.tb01004.xGoogle Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
- Editorial
Summary
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
The research article discusses the process and outcome of peer review in scientific journals, focusing on how this influences the relationship between readers and authors, and reflects on the judgement criteria used in ranking scientific journals.
Peer Review and Content of the Journal
- The research touches on the outcome of peer review, which is seen as the logical result of the authors’ and editors’ efforts. It highlights the demanding nature of Science as a discipline, emphasizing its focus on established facts over what might be desirable or applicable.
- The authors underscore that the goal of any scientific journal is to advance knowledge; hence, it is governed by stringent measures to ensure accuracy and fact presentation.
- The study also considers how scientific journals are ranked and who benefits from this system. It posits that the criteria used in ranking may vary depending on the goals of those making the judgement. Critical stakeholders in this process include readers, authors, clinicians, academics, and the general public.
- Therefore, the judgement of a journal’s status isn’t necessarily a uniform process, but can shift based on the perspectives and objectives of the individuals involved.
Judgement of Journal Status
Cite This Article
APA
Rossdale PD, Mayall ES.
(2007).
The judgement of Solomon and journal status.
Equine Vet J, 39(4), 290-291.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-3306.2007.tb01004.x Publication
Researcher Affiliations
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Evidence-Based Medicine
- Horses
- Humans
- Periodicals as Topic / classification
- Periodicals as Topic / standards
- Veterinary Medicine / standards
Citations
This article has been cited 0 times.Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists
