THE REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS IN MANAGEMENT: THOUGHTS FROM THE PHILOSOPHICAL HERMENEUTICS PERSPECTIVE

Abstract

Although the evaluation of scientific papers is at the heart of all science, it is a process subject to inaccuracies. The objective of this work is to contribute to the improvement of this task through the theoretical framework of Philosophical Hermeneutics. The research examined two management journals, one Brazilian and the other Colombian, while the objects of the analysis were: (i) the paper assessment forms used by the journals, and (ii) the reviewers’ opinions on a sample of papers. The data collection technique used was documentary research and content analysis was employed as the methodological procedure. The findings revealed two journals with different assessment concepts and policies, of which we highlight (i) that a reviewer’s greatest contribution lies in his or her suggested recommendations, (ii) that there is no possibility of convergence among reviewers for any specific paper, (iii) the identification of a paper’s importance depends on the reviewer’s education, in a broad sense, and (iv) that reviewer training programs only ensure convergence with regard to a paper’s formal assessment. The conclusion reached is that adopting the Hermeneutics approach, as employed in this study, may lead to increased competence in reviewers.