Suchergebnisse

The authors respond to a series of critiques of the article titled "Scholarly Achievements of Social Work's Editorial Board and Consulting Editors: A Commentary." Most of the respondents agreed that the findings of the authors' research concerning the editorial board and consulting editors were telling. By focusing on the respondents' comments, the authors suggest that the data reported in their initial study are "compelling and disturbing." New avenues of research on the topic of editorial boards are offered. Suggestions for improving the intellectual climate of the field of social work are also provided.

The present study centers on the distinction and achievement levels of Social Work's editorial board and its supporting consulting editors. The findings suggest that the editorial board and consulting editors of Social Work studied during the 6-year time period (1990 to 1995) were un-distinguished in the area of scholarly productivity. The authors offer strategies for improving the quality of the peer reviewers for one of the profession's most important journals.