For academic journals--do people think that editorial board review journals equally belongs to "academic" journals" compared to the more stereotypical peer review ones? For me, I wonder because I am a PhD student and go back and forth on how to weigh this when formatting my C/V, choosing journals to submit to, etc.
Both editorial board review and blind review have their own advantages and disadvantages. The best type of review for a particular journal will depend on a number of factors, including the journal's scope, standards, and resources.
In general, blind review is considered to be the more rigorous type of review, as it reduces the potential for bias. However, editorial board review can be more efficient and can help to ensure that manuscripts are aligned with the journal's scope and standards.
Many journals use a combination of editorial board review and blind review. For example, a journal may use editorial board review to screen manuscripts for initial suitability, and then send out promising manuscripts for blind review.
Ultimately, the goal of both editorial board review and blind review is to improve the quality of the manuscripts published in the journal.
I would recommend choosing journals according to how well-known and widely cited they are in your field. A good starting point is the bibliography sections of your own papers -- where do the authors that you cite choose to publish their work?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics
- Statistics