عنوان مقاله [English]
Objective: the present paper aims at exploring the diagnosis of papers review process and also presenting a common framework.
Methodology: To conduct the study, qualitative approaches and content analysis were taken. The research population is composed of all faculty members of faculties of psychology and education in the Tehran’s universities. A sample of 15 professors from Kharazmi and Shahid Beheshti universities were selected as researcher informers using purposive sampling. To collect data, semi structured interview was applied and open coding as well as selective coding were used for analysis.
Findings: The findings indicate that scientific papers review should be made on the basis of 5 criteria: scientific, academic moral, article content consistency, writing techniques, and journal-article match. The results also show that there are some problems in reviewing papers such as non professional journals, lack of match between reviewers-articles, information and software weaknesses, reviews prolong, bias and neglect of quality, lack of acceptable criteria for review, and moral slide of reviewers.
Conclusion: research in the various aspects impacts on the scientific community and used for academic promotion, admit to higher levels and to obtain better employment condition. So identification of damage and develop acceptable formwork, can have significant impact in this area and could be used to reduce the bias of review domain and provide a common framework for papers review.