Publication behaviour and (dis)qualification of chief editors in Turkish national Social Sciences journals.

This study investigated the publication behaviour of 573 chief editors managing 432 Social Sciences journals in Turkey. Direct inquiries into editorial qualifications are rare, and this research aims to shed light on editors' scientific leadership capabilities. This study contrasts insider publication behaviour in national journals with international articles in journals indexed by the Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus. It argues that editors demonstrating a consistent ability to publish in competitive WOS and Scopus indexed journals signal high qualifications, while editors with persistent insider behaviour and strong local orientation signal low qualification. Scientific leadership capability is measured by first-authored publications. Correlation and various regression tests are conducted to identify significant determinants of publication behaviour. International publications are rare and concentrated on a few individuals, while insider publications are endemic and constitute nearly 40% of all national articles. Editors publish 3.2 insider papers and 8.1 national papers for every SSCI article. 62% (58%) of the editors have no SSCI (Scopus) article, 53% (63%) do not have a single lead-authored WOS (Scopus) article, and 89% publish at least one insider paper. Only a minority consistently publish in international journals; a fifth of the editors have three or more SSCI publications, and a quarter have three or more Scopus articles. Editors with foreign Ph.D. degrees are the most qualified and internationally oriented, whereas non-mobile editors are the most underqualified and underperform other editors by every measure. Illustrating the overall lack of qualification, nearly half of the professor editors and the majority of the WOS and Scopus indexed journal editors have no record of SSCI or Scopus publications. This research relies on local settings that encourage national publications at the expense of international journals. Findings should be evaluated in light of this setting and bearing in mind that narrow localities are more prone to peer favouritism. Incompetent and nepotistic editors pose an imminent threat to Turkish national literature. A lasting solution would likely include the dismissal and replacement of unqualified editors, as well as delisting and closure of dozens of journals that operate in questionable ways and serve little scientific purpose. To my knowledge, this is the first study to document the publication behaviour of national journal chief editors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]