Status bias in Chinese scholarly publishing: an exploratory study based on mixed methods

References

• Auspurg, K., T. Hinz, and A. Schneck. 2014. “Ausmaß und Risikofaktoren des Publication Bias in der deutschen Soziologie.” KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 66 (4): 549–573. doi:10.1007/s11577-014-0284-3.
   Google Scholar
• Blanco-Perez, C., and A. Brodeur. 2020. “Publication Bias and Editorial Statement on Negative Findings.” The Economic Journal 130 (629): 1226–1247. doi:10.1093/ej/ueaa011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brenner, R. J. 2010. “On the More Insidious Manifestations of Bias in Scientific Reporting.” Journal of the American College of Radiology 7 (7): 490–494. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2010.02.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodie S, Frainer A, Pennino M Grazia, Jiang S, Kaikkonen L, Lopez J, Ortega-Cisneros K, Peters C A, Selim S A and Văidianu N. (2021). Equity in science: advocating for a triple-blind review system. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 36(11), 957–959. 10.1016/j.tree.2021.07.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, A. Y., and N. Cesare. 2020. “Handing the Microphone to Women: Changes in Gender Representation in Editorial Contributions across Medical and Health Journals 2008-2018.” International Journal of Health Policy and Management 9 (7): 269–273. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2020.06.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DePoy, E., and L. N. Gitlin. 2016. “Formulating Research Questions and Queries.” In Introduction to Research, edited by E. DePoy and L. N. Gitlin, 97–111. Amsterdam: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-26171-5.00008-2.
   Google Scholar
• Faggion, C. M.,sJr. 2022. “Are Highly Ranked Dental Journals at Risk of Editorial Bias? an Examination of Information on the Reporting of peer-review Practices.” Accountability in Research 1–12. January 25. doi:10.1080/08989621.2022.2028625.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guan, H., Z. Zhang, A. Zhao, J. Jia, and S. Guan. 2019. “Research on Innovation Behavior and Performance of New Generation Entrepreneur Based on Grounded Theory.” Sustainability 11 (10): 2883. doi:10.3390/su11102883.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo, F., and X. Li. 2017. “Editorial Favoritism, Guanxi Articles and Citation Discount: Evidence from Top Chinese Economics Journals.” China Economic Quarterly 16 (4): 1237–1260. doi:10.13821/j.cnki.ceq.2017.03.01.
   Google Scholar
• Kendall, J. 1999. “Axial Coding and the Grounded Theory Controversy.” Western Journal of Nursing Research 21 (6): 743–757. doi:10.1177/019394599902100603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kozlowski, D., V. Larivière, C. R. Sugimoto, and T. Monroe-White. 2022. “Intersectional Inequalities in Science.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119 (2): 1–8. doi:10.1073/pnas.2113067119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Y. 2021. “Why Is There Great Pressure for Academic Publication? We Chatted with 4 Young University Liberal Arts Teachers.” Wappass.baidu.com. August 7. https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1707131173891653142&wfr=spider&for=pc
   Google Scholar
• Louise Barriball K and While A. (1994). Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: a discussion paper. J Adv Nurs, 19(2), 328–335. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01088.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lutmar, C., and Y. Reingewertz. 2021. “Academic in-group Bias in the Top Five Economics Journals.” Scientometrics 126 (12): 9543–9556. doi:10.1007/s11192-021-04174-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malinova, M., and J. Mendling. 2018. “Identifying Do’s and Don’ts Using the Integrated Business Process Management Framework.” Business Process Management Journal 24 (4): 882–899. doi:10.1108/bpmj-10-2016-0214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martínez-Rosales, E., A. Hernández-Martínez, S. Sola-Rodríguez, I. Esteban-Cornejo, and A. Soriano-Maldonado. 2021. “Representation of Women in Sport Sciences Research, Publications, and Editorial Leadership Positions: Are We Moving Forward?” Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 24 (11). doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2021.04.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matías-Guiu, J., and R. García-Ramos. 2011. “Sesgos en la edición de las publicaciones científicas.” Neurología 26 (1): 1–5. doi:10.1016/j.nrl.2010.11.001.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Merton, R. K. 1968. “The Matthew Effect in Science: The Reward and Communication Systems of Science are Considered.” Science 159 (3810): 56–63. doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miró, Ò., G. Burillo–Putze, P. K. Plunkett, and A. F. T. Brown. 2010. “Female Representation on Emergency Medicine Editorial Teams.” European Journal of Emergency Medicine 17 (2): 84–88. doi:10.1097/mej.0b013e32832e98f7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moustafa, K. 2015. “Is There Bias in Editorial Choice? Yes.” Scientometrics 105 (3): 2249–2251. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1617-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olson, C. M. 2002. “Publication Bias in Editorial Decision Making.” JAMA 287 (21): 2825. doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2825.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pérez Andrés, C. 2015. “La publicación continua frente a la publicación periódica: Otra vuelta de tuerca en la edición de las revistas científicas en Internet.” Revista Española de Salud Pública 89 (6): 533–536. doi:10.4321/s1135-57272015000600001.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pieterse, H. 2013. “An Emerging Grounded Theory in South Africa with Matthew 25:31-46 as Sermon Text.” Acta Theologica 33 (1). doi:10.4314/actat.v33i1.9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rieger, K. L. 2018. “Discriminating among Grounded Theory Approaches.” Nursing Inquiry 26 (1): 1–12. doi:10.1111/nin.12261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shalvi, S., M. Baas, M. J. J. Handgraaf, and C. De Dreu. 2010. “Write When Hot - Submit When Not: Seasonal Bias in Peer Review or Acceptance?” Learned Publishing 23 (2): 117–123. doi:10.1087/20100206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Si, D. 2016. “How Can Academic Research Be Based on Titles Alone?” Guangming Daily. June 24. http://opinion.people.com.cn/n1/2016/0624/c1003-28474996.html
   Google Scholar
• Tang, G., and J. Jia. 2021. “Why Do Master’s Students of Humanities and Social Sciences Publish Papers in Chinese-language Predatory Journals? A Qualitative Study Based on Grounded Theory.” Accountability in Research 1–20. August 5. doi:10.1080/08989621.2021.1960164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang, G., and J. Jia. 2022. “Characteristics of Blacklisted Journals: Evidence from Chinese-language Academic Journals.” Accountability in Research 1–13. August. doi:10.1080/08989621.2022.2112953.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang, L., P. Shapira, and J. Youtie. 2015. “Is There a Clubbing Effect Underlying Chinese Research Citation Increases?” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66 (9): 1923–1932. doi:10.1002/asi.23302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tutuncu, L., R. Yucedogru, and I. Sarisoy. 2022. “Academic Favoritism at Work: Insider Bias in Turkish National Journals.” Scientometrics 127 (5): 2547–2576. doi:10.1007/s11192-022-04355-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Victora, C. G., and C. B. Moreira. 2006. “Publicações científicas e as relações Norte-Sul: Racismo editorial?” Revista de Saúde Pública 40 (spe): 36–42. doi:10.1590/s0034-89102006000400006.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wu, Y., G. Wu, and S. Ma. 2016. “Review on the Origin, Genre and Application of the Grounded Theory Method.” Journal of Distance Education 35 (3): 32–41. doi:10.15881/j.cnki.cn33-1304/g4.2016.03.004.
   Google Scholar