Revising as reframing: Original submissions versus published papers in administrative science quarterly, 2005 to 2009

Sociological Theory

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 71-96

  Strang, David ^a   Siler, Kyle ^b  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

peer review; social evaluation; sociology of science

Indexed keywords

EID: 84926388765     PISSN: 07352751     EISSN: 14679558     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0735275115572152     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Abbott Andrew The System of Professions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press ; 1988 :
2. Abbott Andrew Department and Discipline. Chicago: University of Chicago Press ; 1999 :
3. Bakanic Von, McPhail Clark, Simon Rita J.. The Manuscript Review and Decision-making Process. American Sociological Review. 1987 ; 52 (5). 631-42
4. Bazerman Charles Shaping Written Knowledge. University of Wisconsin Press ; 1988 :
5. Bedeian Arthur G.. Peer Review and the Social Construction of Knowledge in the Management Discipline. Academy of Management Learning and Education. 2004 ; 3 (2). 198-216
6. Benford Robert D., Snow David A.. Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment. Annual Review of Sociology. 2000 ; 26: 611-39
7. Beyer Janice M., Chanove Roland G., Fox William B.. The Review Process and the Fates of Manuscripts Submitted to AMJ. Academy of Management Journal. 1995 ; 38 (5). 1219-60
8. Social Knowledge in the Making. Camic Charles Gross Neil Lamont Michèle, ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press ; 2011 :
9. Chubin Daryl E., Hackett Edward J. Peerless Science. Albany: State University of New York Press ; 1990 :
10. Cicchetti Domenic V.. The Reliability of Peer Review for Manuscript and Grant Submissions: A Cross-disciplinary Investigation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1991 ; 14 (1). 119-35
11. Collins Harry M., Pinch Trevor J. The Golem. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press ; 1998 :
12. Collins Randall. Why the Social Sciences Won't Become High-consensus, Rapid-discovery Science. Sociological Forum. 1981 ; 9 (2). 155-77
13. Cozzens Susan E.. Comparing the Sciences: Citation Context Analysis of Papers from Neuropharmacology and the Sociology of Science. Social Studies of Science. 1985 ; 15 (1). 127-53
14. Ellison Glenn. Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory. Journal of Political Economy. 2002 ; 110 (5). 994-1034
15. Espeland Wendy Nelson, Sauder Michael. Rankings and Reactivity: How Public Measures Recreate Social Worlds. American Journal of Sociology. 2007 ; 113 (1). 1-40
16. Frey Bruno S.. Publishing as prostitution? - Choosing between one's own ideas and academic success. Public Choice. 2003 ; 116: 205-23
17. Frickel Scott, Gross Neil. A General Theory of Scientific/Intellectual Movements. American Sociological Review. 2005 ; 70 (2). 204-32
18. Gieryn Thomas F.. Boundary-work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists. American Sociological Review. 1983 ; 48 (6). 781-95
19. Goffman Erving Frame Analysis. Boston: Northeastern University Press ; 1974 :
20. Goodman Steven N., Berlin Jesse, Fletcher Suzanne W.. Manuscript Quality Before and After Peer Review and Editing at Annals of Internal Medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1994 ; 121 (1). 11-21
21. Gross Neil. A Pragmatist Theory of Social Mechanisms. American Sociological Review. 2009 ; 74 (3). 358-79
22. Guetzkow Joshua, Lamont Michèle, Mallard Grégoire. What Is Originality in the Humanities and the Social Sciences?. American Sociological Review. 2004 ; 69 (2). 190-212
23. Hambrick Donald C.. The Field of Management's Devotion to Theory: Too Much of a Good Thing?. Academy of Management Journal. 2007 ; 50 (6). 1346-52
24. Hargens Lowell L.. Scholarly Consensus and Journal Rejection Rates. American Sociological Review. 1988 ; 53 (1). 139-51
25. Hargens Lowell L.. Variation in Journal Peer Review Systems: Possible Causes and Consequences. JAMA. 1990 ; 263 (10). 1348-1352
26. Hargens Lowell L.. Using the Literature: Reference Networks, Reference Contexts, and the Social Structure of Scholarship. American Sociological Review. 2000 ; 65 (6). 846-65
27. Hopewell Sally, Collins Gary, Yu Ly-Mee, Cook Jonathan, Boutron Isabelle, Shamseer Larissa, Shanyinde Milensu, Wharton Rose, Altman Douglas G.. The Reporting of Randomized Trials: Changes after Peer Review (CAPRI). Paper presented at the International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication ; 2013 Chicago ; 2013..
28. Jauch Lawrence R., Wall Jerry L.. What They Do When They Get Your Manuscript: A Survey of Academy of Management Reviewer Practices. Academy of Management Journal. 1989 ; 32 (1). 157-73
29. Kerr Norbert L.. HARKing: Hypothesizing after the Results are Known. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 1998 ; 2 (3). 196-217
30. Kerr Steven, Tolliver James, Petree Doretta. Manuscript characteristics which influence acceptance for management and social science journals. Academy of Management Journal. 1977 ; 20: 132-41
31. Lamont Michèle How Professors Think. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press ; 2009 :
32. Lamont Michèle. Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation. Annual Review of Sociology. 2012 ; 38: 201-21
33. Larson Magali Sarfatti The Rise of Professionalism. Oakland: University of California Press ; 1977 :
34. Latour Bruno Science in Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press ; 1987 :
35. Latour Bruno, Woolgar Steve Laboratory Life. Sage ; 1979 :
36. Lock Stephen A Difficult Balance. Philadelphia: ISI Press ; 1985 :
37. Leahey Erin. Alphas and Asterisks: The Development of Statistical Significance Testing Standards in Sociology. Social Forces. 2005 ; 84 (1). 1-24
38. Locke Karen, Golden-Biddle Karen. Constructing Opportunities for Contribution: Structuring Intertextual Coherence and 'Problematizing' in Organizational Studies. Academy of Management Journal. 1997 ; 40 (5). 1023-62
39. Mahoney Michael J.. Publication Prejudices: An Experimental Study of Confirmatory Bias in the Peer Review System. Cognitive Therapy and Research. 1977 ; 1 (2). 161-75
40. Mallard Gregoire, Lamont Michèle, Guetzkow Joshua. Fairness as Appropriateness: Negotiating Epistemological Differences in Peer Review. Science, Technology and Human Values. 2009 ; 34 (5). 573-606
41. Merton Robert K. The Sociology of Science. University of Chicago Press ; 1973 :
42. Mills C. Wright. Language, logic, and culture. American Sociological Review. 1939 ; 4: 670-80
43. Mone Mark A., McKinley William. The Uniqueness Value and Its Consequences for Organization Studies. Journal of Management Inquiry. 1993 ; 2 (3). 284-96
44. Myers Greg. Texts as Knowledge Claims: The Social Construction of Two Biology Articles. Social Studies of Science. 1985 ; 15 (4). 593-630
45. Peters Douglas P., Ceci Stephen J.. Peer-review Practices of Psychological Journals: The Fate of Published Articles, Submitted Again. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1982 ; 5 (2). 187-255
46. Pinch Trevor. Towards an analysis of scientific observation: The externality and evidential significance of observational reports in physics. Social Studies of Science. 1985 ; 15: 3-36
47. Ramos-Alvarez Manuel M., Moreno-Fernandez Maria M., Valdes-Conroy Berenice, Catena Andres. Criteria of the Peer Review Process for Publication of Experimental and Quasi-experimental Research in Psychology: A Guide for Creating Research Papers. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. 2008 ; 8 (3). 751-64
48. Squazzoni Flaminio. Peering into Peer Review. Sociologica. 2010 ; 4 (3). 1-27
49. Strang David, Siler Kyle. From 'Just the Facts' to 'More Theory and Methods, Please': The Evolution of the Research Article in Administrative Science Quarterly, 1956-2008. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Academy of Management ; 2013 Orlando, FL ; 2013..
50. Zuckerman Ezra W.. Construction, Concentration, and (Dis)Continuities in Social Valuations. Annual Review of Sociology. 2012 ; 38: 223-43
51. Zuckerman Harriet, Merton Robert K.. Patterns of Evaluation in Science: Institutionalisation, Structure and Functions of the Referee System. Minerva. 1971 ; 9 (1). 66-100