The as-is journal review process: Let authors own their ideas

Academy of Management Learning and Education

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 128-136

  Tsang, Eric W K ^a   Frey, Bruno S ^b  

^a WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34147195973     PISSN: 1537260X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5465/AMLE.2007.24401710     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Aksnes, D. W. 2006. Citation rates and perceptions of scientific contribution. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57: 169-185.
2. Ashford, S. J. 1996. The publishing process: The struggle for meaning. In P. J. Frost & M. S. Taylor (Eds.), Rhythms of academic life: Personal accounts of careers in academic: 119-127. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3. Ashforth, B. E. 2005. Becoming vanilla pudding: How we undermine our passion for research. Journal of Management Inquiry, 14: 400-403.
4. Bailey, J. R. 2004. Educating Rita. Academy of Management learning and Education, 3: 197.
5. Bailey, J. R. 2005. From the editor. Academy of Management learning and Education, 4: 133-134.
6. Baird, L. M., & Oppenheim, C. 1994. Do citations matter? Journal of Information Science, 20: 2-15.
7. Becker, G. S. 1976. The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
8. Bedeian, A. G. 2003. The manuscript review process: The proper roles of authors, referees, and editors. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12: 331-338.
9. Bedeian, A. G. 2004. Peer review and the social construction of knowledge in the management discipline. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3: 198-216.
10. Bergh, D. D., Perry, J., & Hanke, R. 2006. Some predictions of SMJ article impact. Strategic Management Journal, 27: 81-100.
11. Beyer, J. M. 1996. Becoming a journal editor. In P. J. Frost & M. S. Taylor (Eds.), Rhythms of academic life: Personal accounts of careers in academia: 287-297. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12. Brief, A. P. 2003. Editor's comments: AMR - The often misunderstood journal. Academy of Management Review, 28: 7-8.
13. Brown, L. D. 2005. The importance of circulating and presenting manuscripts: Evidence from the accounting literature. Accounting Review, 80: 55-83.
14. Campanario, J. M. 1996. Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47: 302-310.
15. Cappelli, P. 2005. From the editor. Academy of Management Executive, 19(1): 5.
16. Eisenhart, M. 2002. The paradox of peer review: Admitting too much or allowing too little? Research in Science Education, 32: 241-255.
17. Ellison, G. 2002. The slowdown of the economics publishing process. Journal of Political Economy, 110: 947-993.
18. Engers, M., & Gans, J. S. 1998. Why referees are not paid (enough). American Economic Review, 88: 1341-1349.
19. Eysenck, H. J. 1980. Editorial. Personality and Individual Differences, 1: 1-2.
20. nd ed.). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
21. Frey, B. S. 2003. Publishing as prostitution? Choosing between one's own ideas and academic success. Public Choice, 116: 205-223.
22. Homburg, C. 2003. Publishing processes in the academic marketing discipline in the United States: A German perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 348-350.
23. Kirchgässner, G. 1992, Towards a theory of low cost decisions. European Journal of Political Economy, 8: 305-320.
24. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3: 383-397.
25. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 2003. A memoir and reflection: Knowledge and an evolutionary theory of the multinational firm 10 years later. Journal of International Business Studies, 34: 505-515.
26. Meyer, A. D. 1996. Balls, strikes, and collisions on the base path: Ruminations of a veteran reviewer. In P. J. Frost & M. S. Taylor (Eds.), Rhythms of academic life: Personal accounts of careers in academic: 275-282. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27. Miner, J. B. 2003. Commentary on Arthur Bedeian's "The manuscript review process: The proper roles of authors, referees, and editors." Journal of Management Inquiry, 12: 339-343.
28. Murnighan, J. K. 1996. Revising and resubmitting: Author emotions, editor roles, and the value of dialogue. In P. J. Frost & M. S. Taylor (Eds.), Rhythms of academic life: Personal accounts of careers in academia: 135-142. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. Northcraft, G. B. 2001. From the editors. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 1079-1080.
30. Rojewski, J. W., & Domenico, D. M. 2004. The art and politics of peer review. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 20(2): 41-54.
31. Romanelli, E. 1996. Becoming a reviewer: Lessons somewhat painfully learned. In P. J. Frost & M. S. Taylor (Eds.), Rhythms of academic life: Personal accounts of careers in academic: 263-267. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Roth, W.-M. 2002. Editorial power/authorial suffering, Research in Science Education, 32: 215-240.
33. Rynes, S. L., Hillman, A., Ireland, R. D., Kirkman, B., Law, K., Miller, C. C., Rajagopalan, N., & Shapiro, D. 2005. From the editors: Everything you've always wanted to know about AMI (but may have been afraid to ask). Academy of Management Journal, 48: 732-737.
34. Spector, P. E. 1998. Fall. When reviewers become authors: A comment on the journal review process. Research Methods Forum: 1-4. [A publication of the Research Methods Division, Academy of Management.] Retrieved December 11, 2005, from http://www.aom.pace.edu/rmd/1998_forum_reviewers_become_authors. html
35. Starbuck, W. H. 2003. Turning lemons into lemonade: Where is the value in peer reviews? Journal of Management Inquiry, 12: 344-351.
36. Starbuck, W. H. 2005. How much better are the most-prestigious journals? The statistics of academic publication. Organization Science, 16: 180-200.
37. Sutton, R. I. 1996. Work as a parade of decision letters: Pleasures and burdens of being an associate editor at the Administrative Science Quarterly. In P. I. Frost & M. S. Taylor (Eds.), Rhythms of academic life: Personal accounts of careers in academic: 299-307. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38. Van Lange, P. A. M. 1999. Why authors believe that reviewers stress limiting aspects of manuscripts: The SLAM effect in peer review. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29:2550-2566.