Examining Marketing Journals' Publication Process and Reviewer Practices

Abstract

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.