This paper investigates the extent to which staff editors’ evaluations of submitted manuscripts—that is, internal evaluations
carried out before external peer reviewing—are valid. To answer this question we utilized data on the manuscript reviewing
process at the journal Angewandte Chemie International Edition. The results of this study indicate that the initial internal evaluations are valid. Further, it appears that external review
is indispensable for the decision on the publication worthiness of manuscripts: (1) For the majority of submitted manuscripts,
staff editors are uncertain about publication worthiness; (2) there is a statistically significant proportional difference
in “Rejection” between the editors' initial evaluation and the final editorial decision (after peer review); (3) three-quarters
of the manuscripts that were rated negatively at the initial internal evaluation but accepted for publication after the peer
review had far above-average citation counts.
The fifteenth-century manuscript Suppl. Gr. 45 (Austrian National Library, ÖNB, Vienna) contains an extensive Greek-Latin dictionary, where one can find a great number of marginal notes written by different hands and in different languages (Greek, Latin and Italian). Approximately sixty of these glossary notes are quotations from the well-known Byzantine code of law, the Basilika (9th century), which was initiated by Emperor Basil I and completed under the reign of his successor, Leo VI the Wise. In my paper, I intend to examine these marginal notes and argue that their direct source text is not the monumental code of law, the Basilika itself, but rather its abridged version from the 10th cent., the SynopsisMaior Basilicorum.
The Hungarian (Székely) Gábor Bálint of Szentkatolna (1844–1913) was one of the first researchers of Kalmyk and Khalkha vernacular language, folklore and ethnography. His valuable records are written in a very accurate transcription and include the specimens of Kalmyk and Khalkha spoken languages, folklore material and ethnographic narratives, and a comparative grammar of western and eastern Mongolian languages. Bálint’s manuscripts had not been released until recent years when Ágnes Birtalan published his Comparative Grammar in 2009 and the Kalmyk corpus with a comprehensive analysis in 2011.
The present article aims to give an introduction to Bálint’s ethnographic materials recorded among the Kalmyks (1871–1872) and Khalkhas (1873). Despite the similar economic and cultural milieu the two ethnic groups lived in, there is considerable difference between the Kalmyk and Khalkha text corpora. Besides presenting and systematising Bálint’s ethnographic material, I shall try to clarify the reason why this significant divergence emerges between the two text corpora. Specimens of a particular phase of the wedding ceremony are represented as examples from both text corpora.
Authors:Lutz Bornmann, Irina Nast and Hans-Dieter Daniel
The case of Dr. Hwang Woo Suk, the South Korean stem-cell researcher, is arguably the highest profile case in the history
of research misconduct. The discovery of Dr. Hwang’s fraud led to fierce criticism of the peer review process (at Science). To find answers to the question of why the journal peer review system did not detect scientific misconduct (falsification
or fabrication of data) not only in the Hwang case but also in many other cases, an overview is needed of the criteria that
editors and referees normally consider when reviewing a manuscript. Do they at all look for signs of scientific misconduct
when reviewing a manuscript? We conducted a quantitative content analysis of 46 research studies that examined editors’ and
referees’ criteria for the assessment of manuscripts and their grounds for accepting or rejecting manuscripts. The total of
572 criteria and reasons from the 46 studies could be assigned to nine main areas: (1) ‘relevance of contribution,’ (2) ‘writing
/ presentation,’ (3) ‘design / conception,’ (4) ‘method / statistics,’ (5) ‘discussion of results,’ (6) ‘reference to the
literature and documentation,’ (7) ‘theory,’ (8) ‘author’s reputation / institutional affiliation,’ and (9) ‘ethics.’ None of the criteria or reasons that were assigned to the nine main areas refers to or is related to possible falsification or
fabrication of data. In a second step, the study examined what main areas take on high and low significance for editors and
referees in manuscript assessment. The main areas that are clearly related to the quality of the research underlying a manuscript
emerged in the analysis frequently as important: ‘theory,’ ‘design / conception’ and ‘discussion of results.’
Peerenboom, R. P. (1993): Law and Morality in Ancient China-The Silk Manuscripts of Huang-Lao. Albany, State University of New York Press.
Law and Morality in Ancient China-The Silk Manuscripts of Huang
A Viennese manuscript of the first act of Mozart's Die Zauberflöte recently surfaced in Budapest. The title page indicates that it was sold by the actor, singer and theatre copyist, Kaspar Weiß in 1796, and bears the name “Theater auf der Wieden” in Weiß's handwriting. This is the only known score with a clear connection to the theatre for which Mozart composed his singspiel. It was probably based on the theatre's score, which was certainly copied from Mozart's autograph. Upon close investigation the Budapest manuscript reveals a number of deviations from the autograph, variants that suggest something of a performing tradition that may in fact date back to Mozart himself, who conducted the first performances. At least one other Viennese copy of DieZauberflöte exhibits similar peculiarities, indicating a path of transmission that complements the one going back to Constanze Mozart, who sold copies based on the autograph.
Authors:Katalin Ferenczi-Fodor, Bernd Renger and Zoltán Végh
Analytical procedures to be used in pharmaceutical quality control have to be validated strictly in accordance with highly formalized standards and guidance. Manuscripts submitted for publication presenting new procedures must therefore describe the corresponding validation characteristics and the validation approach and procedure accordingly. Interestingly, many of these manuscripts and — what is worse — already published (and therefore accepted) articles in various periodicals are characterized by several typical methodological failures and misconceptions — even though authors have regularly been informed of such mistakes in the hope they can be avoided. The corresponding ICH guideline seems to be well-known, and is frequently cited in these manuscripts, but to some extent is not fully understood and is even partially neglected. In this paper the authors present a collection of typical failures, misconceptions, and misleading data captured as reviewers and readers of published articles over the last two years, thus giving a survey of the most frequent problems of TLC/HPTLC validation. Moreover, the authors provide a list of references describing optimum approaches to validation of specific TLC/HPTLC procedures. We suggest these are followed in addition to the general concepts of the ICH guideline.
Editorial delay, the time between submission and acceptance of scientific manuscripts, was investigated for a set of 4,540
papers published in 13 leading food research journals. Groups of accelerated papers were defined as those that fell in the
lower quartile of the distribution of the editorial delay for the journals investigated. Delayed papers are those in the upper
quartile of the distribution. Editorial stage is related to the peer review process and two variables were investigated in
search of any bias in editorial review that could influence publication delay: countries of origin of the manuscript and authors’
previous publishing experience in the same journal. A ranking of countries was established based on contributions to the leading
food research journals in the period 1999–2004 and four categories comprising heavy, medium, light and occasional country
producers was established. Chi square tests show significant differences in country provenance of manuscripts only for one
journal. The results for influence on editorial delay of cross-national research and international collaboration, conducted
by means of the Fisher statistic test, were similar. A two-tailed Student’s t test shows significant differences (p<0.05)
in the distribution of experienced and novel authors across the delayed and accelerated groups of papers. Although these results
are time and discipline limited, it can be concluded that authors’ publishing experience causes a faster review and acceptance
of their papers and that neither country of provenance nor cross-national research influence the time involved in editorial
acceptance of the papers.