Essential Features for a Scholarly Journal Content Management and Peer Review Software

  The present study investigates the software used in scientific journals for content management and peer review, in order to identify the essential features. These softwares are analyzed and presented in tabular format. A questionnaire was prepared and submitted to a panel composed of 15 referees,...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fatima Sheikh Shoaie, Mehdi Husseini
Format: Article
Language:fas
Published: Iranian Research Institute for Information and Technology 2010-03-01
Series:Iranian Journal of Information Processing & Management
Subjects:
ICT
Online Access:http://jipm.irandoc.ac.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-4-43&slc_lang=en&sid=1
id doaj-a0cd85f0b4f2427c857f6673f8b8a918
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a0cd85f0b4f2427c857f6673f8b8a9182020-11-24T23:24:38ZfasIranian Research Institute for Information and TechnologyIranian Journal of Information Processing & Management2251-82232251-82312010-03-01252289315Essential Features for a Scholarly Journal Content Management and Peer Review SoftwareFatima Sheikh Shoaie0Mehdi Husseini1   The present study investigates the software used in scientific journals for content management and peer review, in order to identify the essential features. These softwares are analyzed and presented in tabular format. A questionnaire was prepared and submitted to a panel composed of 15 referees, editor in chief, software designers and researchers. The essential features for a software managing the review process were divided into three groups with populations of 10-15, 5-10 and 0-5 respectively. The majority of peer review process software features, in view of panelists, fell into a group of features with a population of 10-15. Finally it should be said that the features represented by the first group must be taken into account when designing or purchasing a peer review software. The second tier features (with population of 5-10) are recommended given journal's status and capabilities. The third tier features were altogether discounted due to low population http://jipm.irandoc.ac.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-4-43&slc_lang=en&sid=1Scientific Peer Review process software content management expert assessment Knowledge management ICT
collection DOAJ
language fas
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Fatima Sheikh Shoaie
Mehdi Husseini
spellingShingle Fatima Sheikh Shoaie
Mehdi Husseini
Essential Features for a Scholarly Journal Content Management and Peer Review Software
Iranian Journal of Information Processing & Management
Scientific Peer Review process
software
content management
expert assessment
Knowledge management
ICT
author_facet Fatima Sheikh Shoaie
Mehdi Husseini
author_sort Fatima Sheikh Shoaie
title Essential Features for a Scholarly Journal Content Management and Peer Review Software
title_short Essential Features for a Scholarly Journal Content Management and Peer Review Software
title_full Essential Features for a Scholarly Journal Content Management and Peer Review Software
title_fullStr Essential Features for a Scholarly Journal Content Management and Peer Review Software
title_full_unstemmed Essential Features for a Scholarly Journal Content Management and Peer Review Software
title_sort essential features for a scholarly journal content management and peer review software
publisher Iranian Research Institute for Information and Technology
series Iranian Journal of Information Processing & Management
issn 2251-8223
2251-8231
publishDate 2010-03-01
description   The present study investigates the software used in scientific journals for content management and peer review, in order to identify the essential features. These softwares are analyzed and presented in tabular format. A questionnaire was prepared and submitted to a panel composed of 15 referees, editor in chief, software designers and researchers. The essential features for a software managing the review process were divided into three groups with populations of 10-15, 5-10 and 0-5 respectively. The majority of peer review process software features, in view of panelists, fell into a group of features with a population of 10-15. Finally it should be said that the features represented by the first group must be taken into account when designing or purchasing a peer review software. The second tier features (with population of 5-10) are recommended given journal's status and capabilities. The third tier features were altogether discounted due to low population
topic Scientific Peer Review process
software
content management
expert assessment
Knowledge management
ICT
url http://jipm.irandoc.ac.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-4-43&slc_lang=en&sid=1
work_keys_str_mv AT fatimasheikhshoaie essentialfeaturesforascholarlyjournalcontentmanagementandpeerreviewsoftware
AT mehdihusseini essentialfeaturesforascholarlyjournalcontentmanagementandpeerreviewsoftware
_version_ 1725559688886484992