A Model Faculty Peer Review Process for Counselor Education Programs

The authors describe a counselor education faculty peer review model that addresses the professional functioning of each member of the counselor education faculty regardless of her or his rank, salary, status, or administrative responsibilities.     

Perceptions of Ethical Problems with Scientific Journal Peer Review: An Exploratory Study

This article reports the results of an anonymous survey of researchers at a government research institution concerning their perceptions about ethical problems with journal peer review. Incompetent review was the most common ethical problem reported by the respondents, with 61.8% (SE = 3.3%) claiming to have experienced this at some point during peer review. Bias (50.5%, SE = 3.4%) was the next most common problem. About 22.7% (SE = 2.8%) of respondents said that a reviewer had required them to include unnecessary references to his/her publication(s), 17.7% (SE = 2.6%) said that comments from reviewers had included personal attacks, and 9.6% (SE = 2.0%) stated that reviewers had delayed publication to publish a paper on the same topic. Two of the most serious violations of peer review ethics, breach of confidentiality (6.8%, SE = 1.7%) and using ideas, data, or methods without permission (5%, SE = 1.5%) were perceived less often than the other problems. We recommend that other investigators follow up on our exploratory research with additional studies on the ethics of peer review.     

Ego Identity Status: A Step in the Differentiation Process

This study examined the relationship between identity development and differentiation levels in young adults. A total of 259 participants completed the Extended Version of the Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status (H. D. Grotevant & G. R. Adams, 1984), the Differentiation of Self Inventory (E. A. Skowron & M. L. Friedlander, 1998), and demographic questions. Results showed that each identity status had a unique effect on the various components of differentiation. Implications of the results for counselors and for future researchers are provided.     

Peer Experiences of Anxious and Socially Withdrawn Youth: An Integrative Review of the Developmental and Clinical Literature

Prior research indicates that both anxious youth and socially withdrawn youth tend to experience challenges and difficulties in various aspects of their peer relationships and social functioning. While clinical psychology researchers have examined how anxiety relates to peer experiences using normative and clinically anxious samples, developmental psychologists have focused primarily on the peer experiences of shy and withdrawn children. Research from these two fields has progressed on related yet separate paths, producing similar results despite using different terminology and assessment techniques. The purpose of this review is to bring together the developmental and clinical bodies of literature on the peer experiences of anxious and socially withdrawn youth by identifying common themes and unique contributions of each discipline. Studies reviewed focus specifically on the peer constructs of acceptance, friendship, peer victimization, social skills, and social-cognitive processes. Limitations including methodological inconsistencies and insufficient examination of age-, gender-, and ethnicity-related issues are identified. Recommendations for future collaborations between developmental and clinical researchers as well as implications for interventions targeting the peer relations of anxious and withdrawn youth are discussed.     

Publishing Ethical Research: A Step‐by‐Step Overview

To publish ethical research, one must conduct research responsibly, making ethical choices from the inception of the research idea and throughout the research process. Conducting and publishing ethical research is important because of the impact the results will have on the counseling profession. Steps to consider are discussed.     

跨学科研究的同行评议：问题与改进策略

理想状态下,跨学科研究的同行评议应该是不同学科对话、学习的重要契机,同时,不同学科的专家参与到同行评议中来,促使跨学科研究项目得到公平、公正、科学的评审。然而,由于评价机制、学科壁垒和个人主观因素等原因,这种理想状态难以完全实现。跨学科研究的同行评议存在的问题及如何改进成为跨学科研究面临的难题和学界的关注点。跨学科研究的同行评议面临着缺乏合适的"同行"、评议者学科分化和偏见、学科壁垒和利益冲突等问题。为了应对这些问题,可以从改进评议人选制度、协调不同学科间意见、改革评议机制、建立风险机制等方面来对跨学科研究的同行评议进行改进。     

Characteristics of Peer Review Reports: Editor-Suggested Versus Author-Suggested Reviewers

Science and Engineering Ethics - Peer review is widely recognized as a mechanism for quality control of academic content. This research article aims at comparing the review reports and decisions of...     

A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review

Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily.     

An Empirical Study of the Reports of APA's Peer Review Panel in the Congressional Review of the U.S.S. IOWA Incident

The U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee (HASC) review of the US. Navy's investigation of the U.S.S. IOWA incident provides a case study of the problems with reconstructive psychological evaluations. The US. Navy attributed the explosion on board the U.S.S. IOWA to the intentional suicidal acts of Gunner's Mate Clayton Hartwig, a conclusion supported primarily by an Equivocal Death Analysis (EDA) conducted by the FBI. Systematic analysis of the reports of the expert panelists who consulted to the NASC reveals that 11 of the 14panelists were critical of the conclusions reached by the Navy/FBI. There was considerable variability among the judgments of the panelists, who reached consensus only for broad categories. Because the reliability and validity of postmortem psychological reconstructions such as EDA and psychological autopsy have not been established, clinicians are urged to exercise caution in the use of such procedures and to be sensitive to ethical obligations to consumers when using such techniques.     

Conflict Resolution and Peer Mediation in Middle Schools: Extending the Process and Outcome Knowledge Base

Abstract

Many professional educators are implementing school-based prevention focused on conflict resolution (CR) and peer mediation (PM). The authors conducted research on CR-PM in 3 middle schools. Specifically, they surveyed teachers and students, tracked disciplinary incidents across school years, collected mediation data, and compared mediators with a matched sample to determine attitudinal change as a result of PM training and experience. The authors also surveyed peer mediators and disputants about program satisfaction, as well as peer mediators and their parents about the generalization of PM skills. The authors conclude with implications for developing future CR programs, including a focus on mediation-process evaluation as well as schoolwide outcome measures and the use of peer mediation training as an intervention for students at risk.     

Peer Relationships and Male Academic Achievement: A Review and Suggested Clarification

Earlier reviews of the research have reached conflicting conclusions about the relationship between social behavior and academic achievement. A brief but comprehensive review is presented. It is suggested that there is greater consistency in this research area than has previously been noted. When the research is categorized according to sample age level, it is found among younger subjects that high achievers tend to be more socially active than low achievers, while among college-age students, low achievers tend to be the more socially active. Questions are raised which future research might investigate.     

The Problem of Peer Review is the Most Important Philosophical Problem

As philosophers we should have as one of our aims to produce as much philosophical knowledge as possible. A lot of potential philosophical knowledge is lost because of the flaws of the peer review system, and so a lot of philosophical knowledge would be gained were the system improved. Accordingly, as authors we should write papers about how to fix peer review, and as editors we should accept such papers if they are good. This paper presents some familiar problems with peer review, elaborates on and motivates the argument just given, and replies to some objections to it, making the case that fixing peer review is both a philosophical problem and one that admits of a solution.     

Family Peer Advocates: A Pilot Study of the Content and Process of Service Provision

Professional family peer advocates are increasingly employed by public mental health systems to deliver family-to-family support that reduces barriers families face in accessing children’s mental health care. These services, however, are neither uniformly available nor standardized. This pilot study describes the process, content and context of family-to-family support services. Simulating a parent seeking services, a trained standardized parent participated as a client in meetings with advocates in four programs and collected data through structured observations, a structured survey, and session audiotapes. The “walk-through” process was determined to be feasible and acceptable to family peer advocates as a way of evaluating services. Four family peer advocates provided an average of 25 services during each 2-session simulation with the standardized parent, including the following: information and educational support, instruction and skills development, emotional and affirmational support, instrumental support, and advocacy. Findings also revealed variability in the range of services provided and identified challenges in aspects of service provision, such as boundaries of advocate roles, availability of confidential service environments, and addressing crises and parent concerns about child safety. This paper provides the first in-depth look at services provided by this emerging workforce.     

Conflict(s) of Interest in Peer Review: Its Origins and Possible Solutions

Scientific communication takes place at two registers: first, interactions with colleagues in close proximity—members of a network, school of thought or circle; second, depersonalised transactions among a potentially unlimited number of scholars can be involved (e.g., author and readers). The interference between the two registers in the process of peer review produces a drift toward conflict of interest. Three particular cases of peer review are differentiated: journal submissions, grant applications and applications for tenure. The current conflict of interest policies do not cover all these areas. Furthermore, they have a number of flaws, which involves an excessive reliance on scholars’ personal integrity. Conflicts of interest could be managed more efficiently if several elements and rules of the judicial process were accepted in science. The analysis relies on both primary and secondary data with a particular focus on Canada.