Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Babin, Barry J.
• Moulard, Julie Guidry

Titel

To what is the review process relevant?: What’s right and what’s wrong with peer review for academic business journals

Ist Teil von

• European business review, 2018-01, Vol.30 (2), p.145-156

Erscheinungsjahr

2018

Quelle

Alma/SFX Local Collection

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Purpose The purpose of this paper is to consider various strengths and weaknesses of the academic review process with an emphasis on the effect the process has on the relevance of business journals, particularly in the marketing literature. Design/methodology/approach The authors not only highlight some of the literature addressing the review process but also present insight and opinion largely based on decades of experience editing, reviewing, writing and publishing. Findings Reviewers can help develop research papers, but reviewers remain gatekeepers who, theoretically, protect journals from publishing research that would diminish the truthful body of knowledge within a field. However, many inefficiencies, some of which involve volition, allow one to question whether the review process as we know it best accomplishes that purpose. Practical implications Recognizing that reviewers affect journal prestige, the paper concludes with a number of ideas for improving the gate-keeping and developmental functions for academic articles. Social implications Society should extract value from what appears in publicly circulated, academic, refereed journals. However, to the extent that the publication process interferes with objective dissemination of knowledge, that value is diminished and perhaps even absent. Originality/value The paper intends to stimulate frank conversation about the Academy’s refereed publication process and factors that tend to interfere with its function.