4. Consensus Reviews of Journals in the Group
4.3 Philosophy
4.3.1 Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology
Panel’s consensus view:
i. The journal should continue to be listed on the DHET accredited list.
ii. The journal should be invited to join the SciELO SA platform.
iii. The Editor should seriously consider the suggested recommendations for improvement.
many countries, including Western Europe, East Europe, the USA, Australia, and New Zealand as well as from the far East. African countries include South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Egypt. Issues are pre-scheduled to appear in April/May and September/October. There have been no significant interruptions except for the 2003/2005 period when the IPJP was undergoing a major transition and internal re-organisation.
Over the three-year review period, 51 full articles and five book reviews were published. A total of 115 full article manuscripts and six book reviews were received in the three-year review period. The number of manuscripts rejected without peer review was 13. Five were rejected after peer review, plus one for plagiarism. The proportion of peer-reviewed papers that had at least one author with a non-South African address was 63%.
Two peer reviewers are usually approached for each submitted manuscript. The selection of peer reviewers is based on the area of expertise. Reviewers are scholars who have not previously co- published extensively with the author(s), and who are for this and other reasons free of bias in relation to the subject matter, the author (s) and/or their institution. Peer review is conducted in a ‘blind way’.
Valid reviewer critique and article improvement are rigorously implemented. In addition to the short written assessment that is prepared by each reviewer, there is also a checklist that must be adhered to by each author when revising their papers. Moreover, in cases where the recommendations are substantial, the revised paper is sent back to the same reviewers to obtain their views regarding the calibre of the revised and re-submitted manuscript. Peer reviewers do receive follow-up information.
Reviewer performance is not assessed, and information is not captured in a database.
A total of 29 peer reviewers was used in one year of the review period and 96% of these had non- South African addresses. The peer review reports were accessibly retained in the journal’s records.
The average period between receipt of a manuscript and its publication online is six to nine months.
The Editor has been in office for a period of 15 years and was invited by the Editorial Board. The period of appointment is ongoing. The Editorial Board handles peer review and advises on editorial policies and practices. The duration in office varies for Editorial Board members as there is no set term of office. It is usually commitment and academic passion that sustain their tenure. Members of the Editorial Board were appointed competitively. Nominations are either sought or presented by the Editorial Board and a decision is taken based on academic and scholastic merit. They are appointed from inside and outside the country to provide specific topical expertise.
The journal has editorial guidelines and a conflict-of-interest policy for authors and reviewers. The guidelines are aligned with ASSAf’s Code of Best Practice in Scholarly Journal Publishing, Editing and Peer Review. The journal follows the publisher’s policy on errata. When an error is drawn to the journal’s attention, the published PDF is amended accordingly and re-uploaded. The value-added features include critical editorials, analytical book reviews, and sometimes include correspondence on published articles. The percentage of pages in each issue that represents peer-reviewed original material is 97%.
Content:
(Quality, focus, spread within domain, sample of best work in SA, enrichment features)
Consensus review: The journal has high academic standards in terms of quality of articles published.
The journal is trans-regional in its focus and publishes an adequate number of articles per annum from local and international authors. The journal reflects an adequate sample of the best work done in the country. The journal also includes articles by South African authors that focus on South African issues.
The journal includes useful additional scholarly features like editorials, topical reviews, book reviews, scholarly correspondence, and obituaries.
Essential technical features:
(English abstracts, errata, citation practice, presentation)
Consensus review: Abstracts are in English. The journal has good presentation, design, layout, style, and copy-editing interventions, and images are used in an ethical manner. No errata were published in the period under review, but the journal has a policy for publication of errata. The citation practice is of international standard.
Usefulness in capacity development, and international comparability:
Consensus review: The articles draw from the application of phenomenology to vastly different fields (e.g. psychology, medicine, human resources), so young students/academics will be able to see phenomenology applied in a myriad of disciplines. There is evidence of younger upcoming researchers publishing in collaboration with established scholars. The journal compares very well with other international journals in its field.
Business aspects:
(Business-related criteria; bibliometric assessments)
The IPJP is an online journal published in association with NISC and Taylor & Francis. Regarding ‘legal ownership’, the IPJP is currently represented by the Editor-in-Chief. The production and distribution are not outsourced. The journal does not carry advertising and does not receive financial sponsorship.
There are also no paying subscribers.
Articles accepted for publication by the Editor-in-Chief are subject to an APC of USD650. The corresponding author will be invoiced by the publisher at the time of acceptance and publication of the article will be contingent on payment of the processing fee. The management of editorial workflow is manual and articles are uploaded to the website for publication. The IPJP can be accessed freely online. In 2013, Taylor & Francis approached the IPJP with the request to join their stable while remaining open access. Journal articles are published open access under a Creative Commons licence, which allows the free download and use of the articles with appropriate attribution of authorship. Acceptance of an article for publication is on the understanding that authors will grant in writing a licence to the publisher to publish and sell the article in print form.
The IPJP is included on Ebscohost, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, and SciELO SA. Impact factors have not been determined. Altmetric indicators are administered by Taylor & Francis. ‘Front details’
for papers and English abstracts are mandatory. The IPJP has been independently peer reviewed before.
Suggested improvements:
Consensus review: There is a need to consider increasing contributions from female authors and other races, that is, those currently in the minority in this journal. Phenomenology is, after all, about human experiences.
There are no contributions from Latin America and other African countries. The Editor should consider reaching out to authors from these countries.
Special issues should be considered.
Contributions are mostly from Gauteng and the Western Cape. The representation of other South African universities is poor and should be improved.
The journal charges APCs of USD650 per article and should consider a waiver for those who cannot afford to pay.
The Board members are mostly white men. The Editor should consider diversifying the Editorial Board and include women.
The impact factor should be improved.
The focus of the journal is too broad and special issues should be introduced.
The Editorial Board should contemplate ways to profile the distinct southern hemisphere Indo-Pacific intention of the journal. In this regard, scholars and scholarship from India and China should also find a way into the journal.
The title of the journal is not appealing. The Editor should consider changing the title to attract more contributors.
Panel’s consensus view:
i. The journal should continue to be listed on the DHET accredited list.
ii. The journal is already on the SciELO SA platform.
iii. The Panel believes that the Editor should seriously reflect on the name of the journal to make it more focused.
4.3.2 Philosophical Papers