From the Editors: How to write a high-quality review

Journal of International Business Studies

Volumn 44, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 547-553

  Caligiuri, Paula ^a   Thomas, David C ^a  

^a NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

blind reviews; editorial process; peer reviews

Indexed keywords

EID: 84880322430     PISSN: 00472506     EISSN: 14786990     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/jibs.2013.24     Document Type: Review

References (10)

1. Bedeian, A. G. 2004. Peer review and the social construction of knowledge in the management discipline. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(2): 198-216.
2. Carpenter, M. A. 2009. Editor's comments: Mentoring colleagues in the craft and spirit of peer review. Academy of Management Review, 34(2): 191-195.
3. Hillman, A. J., & Rynes, S. L. 2007. The future of double-blind review in management. Journal of Management Studies, 44(4): 622-627.
4. Kohli, A. K. 2011. From the editor: Reflections on the review process. Journal of Marketing, 75: 1-4.
5. Marchionini, G. 2008. Editorial: Reviewer merits and review control in an age of electronic manuscript management systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 26(4): 1-6.
6. Miller, C. C. 2006. Peer review in the organizational and management sciences: Prevalence and effects of reviewer hostility, bias, and dissensus. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3): 425-431. (Pubitemid 43999075)
7. Northcraft, G. B. 2001. From the editors. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6): 1079-1080.
8. Rynes, S. L. 2006. "Getting on board" with AMJ: Balancing quality and innovation in the review process. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6): 1097-1102.
9. Suls, J., & Martin, R. 2009. The air we breathe: A critical look at practices and alternatives in the peer review process. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(1): 40-50.
10. Tsang, E. W. K., & Frey, B. 2007. The as-is journal review process: Let authors own their ideas. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(1): 128-136.