American Sociological Association: Teaching Ethics Throughout the Curriculum, Ethics, Teaching, Teaching Ethics to Students

Member Login

Join / Contact / Sitemap

Topic: Publication Process

For academics, the publication of one’s research or theory is the culmination of the research process. Indeed, it is one of the principal means (with teaching and service) by which all academics justify their professional status. Whether through printed books, monographs, and articles in journals or in electronic forms, publication is one of the primary ways that sociologists communicate with their colleagues and the general public about their work.

In order for the publication process to operate in an efficient and ethical fashion, professional organizations have established procedures that govern it. While these may vary somewhat from organization to organization, most involve considerations of authorship credit, rules for the submission and withdrawal of a manuscript, the anonymity of authors and reviewers (at least until the material is published) and the fair application of standards. However, since there are many outlets for publication, authors need to be informed about the many possible variations in rules and procedures.

Sociologists, like many other professionals, adhere to the peer review process as a mechanism for insuring that published works are of high quality and have been carried out with appropriate methods. This implies that individual peers offer their time and expertise to review materials that are submitted by others, with the understanding that other knowledgeable peers will in turn review materials that they may submit. Thus, they may serve both as editors and reviewers as well as authors. Editors and reviewers also have ethical responsibilities, especially with regard to insuring that the publication process is handled fairly and in a timely manner.

Case 73. Multiple Submission

Case 74. Reporting full findings

Case 75. Dual submission -- Expansion of ideas

Case 76. Dual submission

Case 77. The Role of Editors in Dual Publications

Case 78. The "Small Circles" Problem

Case 79. Selection of Reviewers -- Perceived personal animosity between a potential reviewer and author.

Case 80. Selection of Reviewers -- Competing approaches in a field

Case 81. Appropriateness of a paper for publication in a journal

Case 82. Appropriateness of reviewing an obviously poor paper

Case 83. Prolonged period of getting a submission reviewed

American Sociological Association: Teaching Ethics Throughout the Curriculum, Ethics, Teaching, Teaching Ethics to Students Member Login Join / Contact / Sitemap Loading About ASA About ASA What is Sociology? Mission Professional Ethics Constitution & Bylaws Public Affairs Awards Committees Elections Governance ASA History Staff Directory Directions to ASA Membership Join or Renew Cost of Membership Member Benefits FAQs Edit Profile Code of Ethics Sections What Are Sections Current Sections Sections Information Section Fees How to Form New Section Section Awards Journals/Publications Journals Editorships Footnotes Rose Book Series Bookstore Advertising and Mailing Lists Mailing and Receipt Dates Reprint Permissions Guides and Directories Meetings Annual Meetings 2013 Annual Meeting 2014 Annual Meeting Committee Meetings Regional Meetings Research on Sociology Research Home Current Research Projects Research Department Blog Briefs and Articles Trends in Sociology Data Resources Survey Design Funding (FAD) Teaching/Learning ASA Annual Teaching Award Academic & Prof. Affairs Chairs Mentor Program Chairs Resources Department Affiliates Ethics Free Downloads & Links High School Sociology Howery Teaching Grants Program Review Section on Teaching Students: Graduate Students: Undergraduate Teaching Resources TRAILS Webinars & Conferences Employment Job Bank Career Resources Facts on Sociology Careers AM Employment Service Employment Bulletin Archives Funding Grants & Fellowships Press Press Public Affairs Communicating w/the Media Op-Eds & Letters to the Editor Media Coverage Former News Speak for Sociology Blog Travels with Erik
TEACHING ETHICS THROUGHOUT THE CURRICULUM
Topic: Publication Process For academics, the publication of one’s research or theory is the culmination of the research process. Indeed, it is one of the principal means (with teaching and service) by which all academics justify their professional status. Whether through printed books, monographs, and articles in journals or in electronic forms, publication is one of the primary ways that sociologists communicate with their colleagues and the general public about their work. In order for the publication process to operate in an efficient and ethical fashion, professional organizations have established procedures that govern it. While these may vary somewhat from organization to organization, most involve considerations of authorship credit, rules for the submission and withdrawal of a manuscript, the anonymity of authors and reviewers (at least until the material is published) and the fair application of standards. However, since there are many outlets for publication, authors need to be informed about the many possible variations in rules and procedures. Sociologists, like many other professionals, adhere to the peer review process as a mechanism for insuring that published works are of high quality and have been carried out with appropriate methods. This implies that individual peers offer their time and expertise to review materials that are submitted by others, with the understanding that other knowledgeable peers will in turn review materials that they may submit. Thus, they may serve both as editors and reviewers as well as authors. Editors and reviewers also have ethical responsibilities, especially with regard to insuring that the publication process is handled fairly and in a timely manner. Case 73. Multiple Submission Case 74. Reporting full findings Case 75. Dual submission -- Expansion of ideas Case 76. Dual submission Case 77. The Role of Editors in Dual Publications Case 78. The "Small Circles" Problem Case 79. Selection of Reviewers -- Perceived personal animosity between a potential reviewer and author. Case 80. Selection of Reviewers -- Competing approaches in a field Case 81. Appropriateness of a paper for publication in a journal Case 82. Appropriateness of reviewing an obviously poor paper Case 83. Prolonged period of getting a submission reviewed	Ethics Courses Department Chairs Resources Topics Additional Information Participants Documents All Cases