Examining Marketing Journals' Publication Process and Reviewer Practices

This study examines reviewer practices at 11 marketing journals. The results for the top three journals are compared to eight comparable journals that are typically considered to be non-top-tier journals. The results suggest that the reviewers and the review processes at the top journals differ sign...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Marketing education review 2011-10, Vol.21 (3), p.251-274
Main Authors: Seiler, Vicky L., Reisenwitz, Timothy H., Schibrowsky, John A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Audits (Verification)
Bias
Business Administration Education
College Faculty
Comparative Analysis
Empathy
Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Methods
Faculty Publishing
Marketing
Peer Evaluation
Periodicals
Program Effectiveness
Publish or Perish Issue
Publishing Industry
Surveys
Writing for Publication
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study examines reviewer practices at 11 marketing journals. The results for the top three journals are compared to eight comparable journals that are typically considered to be non-top-tier journals. The results suggest that the reviewers and the review processes at the top journals differ significantly from those of the non-top-tier journals. One of the most important findings is the degree to which the double-blind review process is being employed. The results may provide aspiring authors with a greater understanding and empathy of the review process, which in turn may allow them to be more successful with their article submissions.
ISSN:1052-8008
2153-9987
DOI:10.2753/MER1052-8008210305