Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Information Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wood, M.
Right arrow Articles by Howell, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Reliability of Peer Reviews of Papers on Information Systems

Michael Wood

Department of Accounting, Law and Management Science, Portsmouth Business School, Portsmouth, UK michael.wood{at}port.ac.uk

Martyn Roberts

Department of Accounting, Law and Management Science, Portsmouth Business School, Portsmouth, UK

Barbara Howell

School of Information Management, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds LS6 3QS, UK

This paper analyses the reliability of the double-blind peer review systems used for submissions to the 2001 and 2002 UK Academy for Information Systems (UKAIS) conferences. The level of reliability found in the first conference was marginally lower than would be expected from a model based on chance. In the second conference the reliability level was significantly better, but still low. The paper explores some of the implications of this for the reviewing system, and suggests a model for assessing the impact of low levels of reliability.

Key Words: peer review • refereeing • reliability • journal review system • science management • knowledge management

Journal of Information Science, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2-11 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0165551504041673
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?