This article is available in: HTML PDF jgi: p. 111

Journal Information
Journal ID (publisher-id): jgi
ISSN: 1910-7595
Publisher: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Article Information
© 1999-2007 The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Publication date: June 2007
First Page: 111 Last Page: 111
Publisher Id: jgi.2007.20.1
DOI: 10.4309/jgi.2007.20.1

Submission results for 2005
Competing interests: Phil Lange is editor of the JGI.
Phil Lange, editor Phil_Lange@camh.net

Scientific journals increasingly make yearly reports to their readers on the numbers of papers submitted, rejected, and accepted. We last offered these statistics in the Journal of Gambling Issues (JGI) for 2003–2004 (see http://www.camh.net/egambling/issue13/jgi_13_intro.html, with an explanation of how the peer-review process functions at the JGI), and we offer them again for 2005. They provide a benchmark against which we will judge our future publications.

You may wonder why we are not publishing statistics for 2006. This is because the peer-review process usually takes longer than 6 months, so many papers submitted at the end of last year are still in review.

In summary, in 2005, 25 papers were submitted for peer review to the JGI. Of these, 16% (4 papers) were rejected by the editor upon submission (for lack of scientific value or poor research design, and for copying already-published graphics without permission). Another 16% (4 papers) were rejected by the reviewers, while 12% (3 papers) of papers were not rewritten after peer review, another 12% were withdrawn by the author (the author felt that the peer-review process was unfair, or decided to publish elsewhere, or felt that other published work had rendered the paper redundant), and 44% (11 papers) were accepted for publication. The latter statistic compares with an acceptance rate of 39% for 2003–2004. We see two factors reflected here. One is that we now receive more papers of higher quality and so more are accepted. The other is that authors are more willing to write revised versions, for in 2003–2004 about one third of authors did not respond with a second version after peer review—a figure that dropped to 12% for 2005.

We hope that what you find in the JGI is of value to you in understanding the place of gambling in our world.

We welcome your comments.


Reference
Lange, P.. ( 2005). The peer review process at theJournal of Gambling Issues. Journal of Gambling Issues, 13. Retrieved May 17, 2006 from http://www.camh.net/egambling/issue13/jgi_13_intro.html

Article Categories:
  • intro

Related Article(s):


Copyright © 2017 | Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Editor-in-chief: Sherry Stewart, Ph.D.
Managing Editor: Vivien Rekkas, Ph.D. (contact)