Examining Marketing Journals' Publication Process and Reviewer Practices

References

• Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) (2007), The AACSB Guide to Business Education, Tampa: AACSB International Knowledge Services.
   Google Scholar
• Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) (2008a), "AACSB Accredited Institutions with Ph.D. Programs," Tampa.
   Google Scholar
• Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) (2008b), Accreditation Standards: Standard 10, Tampa: AACSB International Knowledge Services.
   Google Scholar
• Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) (2008c), The AACSB Guide to Business Education, Tampa: AACSB International Knowledge Services.
   Google Scholar
• Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) (2008d), "Final Report of the AACSB International: Impact of Research Task Force," Tampa.
   Google Scholar
• Altman, N., D. Banks, P. Chen, D. Duffy, J. Hardwick, C. Leger, A. Owen, and T. Stukel (1991), "Meeting the Needs of New Statistical Researchers," Statistical Science, 6 (2), 163-174.
   Google Scholar
• Altman, N., J. F. Angers, D. Banks, D. Duffy, J. Hardwick, C. Leger, M. Martin, D. Nolan, A. Owen, D. Politis, K. Roeder, T. Stukel, and Z. Ying (1992), "Rejoinder," Statistical Science, 7 (2), 265-266.
   Google Scholar
• Amason, A. C. (2005), "The Competitive Advantage of Scholarly Journals: A Shared Responsibility," Journal of Management, 31 (2), 157-161.
   Google Scholar
• Armstrong, J. Scott (1997), "Peer Review for Journals: Evidence on Quality Control, Fairness, and Innovation," Science and Engineering Ethics, 3 (1), 63-84.
   Google Scholar
• Armstrong, J. Scott, and Terry S. Overton (1977), "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (August), 396-402.
   Google Scholar
• Baumgartner, Hans, and Rik Pieters (2003), "The Structural Influence of Marketing Journals: An Analysis of the Discipline by Sub-Areas Over Time," Journal of Marketing, 67 (April), 123-139.
   Google Scholar
• Blank, Rebecca M. (1991), "The Effects of Double-Blind Versus Single-Blind Reviewing," American Economic Review, 81 (December), 1041-1067.
   Google Scholar
• Borkowski, Susan C., and Mary Jeanne Welsh (1998), "Ethics and the Accounting Publishing Process: Author, Reviewer, and Editor Issues," Journal of Business Ethics, 17 (December), 1785-1803.
   Google Scholar
• Bradley, James V. (1981), "Pernicious Publication Practices," Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 18 (1), 31-34.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, Christopher L., Kam C. Chan, and Pikki Lai (2008), "Marketing Journal Coauthorships: An Empirical Analysis of Coauthor Behavior," Journal of Marketing Education, 28 (1), 17-25.
   Google Scholar
• Ceci, Stephen J., and Douglas P. Peters (1984), "How Blind Is Blind Review?" American Psychologist, 39 (12), 1041-1067.
   Google Scholar
• Close, A. G., J. A. Guidry, and K. B. Monroe (2008), "Stay for the A: Factors Influencing Placements and Salaries of Entry-Level Assistant Professors in Marketing," working paper, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
   Google Scholar
• Fletcher, Robert H., and Suzanne W. Fletcher (1997), "Evidence for the Effectiveness of Peer Review," Science and Engineering Ethics, 3 (1), 35-50.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, Michael (1979), "Peer Review in Physics," Physics Bulletin, 30 (March), 112-113.
   Google Scholar
• Hillman, Amy J., and Sara L. Rynes (2007), "The Future of Double-Blind Review in Management," Journal of Management Studies, 44 (4), 622-627.
   Google Scholar
• Holbrook, Morris (1986), "A Note on Sadomasochism in the Review Process: I Hate When That Happens," Journal of Marketing, 50 (3), 104-108.
   Google Scholar
• Homburg, Christian (2003), "Publishing Processes in the Academic Marketing Discipline in the United States: A German Perspective," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31 (3), 348-350.
   Google Scholar
• Houlihan, Daniel, Lisa Hofschulte, and D. Sachau (1992), "Critiquing the Peer Review Process: Examining a Potential Dual Role Conflict," American Psychologist, 47 (12), 1679-1681.
   Google Scholar
• Huber, Joel (2007), "Journal of Marketing Research in the New Competitive Journalistic Environment," Journal of Marketing Research, 44 (February), 1-3.
   Google Scholar
• Hult, G. Tomas M., William T. Neese, and R. Edward Bashaw (1997), "Faculty Perceptions of Marketing Journals," Journal of Marketing Education, 19 (1), 37-52.
   Google Scholar
• Journal of Consumer Research (2002), "New Editor-Elect and Guidance to Authors," 28 (4), 514.
   Google Scholar
• Kardes, Frank, A. V. Muthukrishan, and Vladimir Pashkevich (2005), "On the Conditions Under Which Experience and Motivation Accentuate Bias in Intuitive Judgment," in The Routines of Decision Making, Tilmann Betsch and Susanne Haberstroh, eds., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 139-156.
   Google Scholar
• Koh, Chang (2003), "IS Journal Review Process: A Survey on IS Research Practices and Journal Review Issues," Information and Management, 40 (8), 743-756.
   Google Scholar
• Laband, David N. (1985), "Publishing Favoritism: A Critique of Department Rankings Based on Quantitative Publishing Performance," Southern Economic Journal, 52 (2), 510-515.
   Google Scholar
• Laband, David N., and Michael J. Piette (1994), "Favoritism Versus the Search for Good Papers," Journal of Political Economy, 102 (11), 194-203.
   Google Scholar
• Ladik, Danial M., and David W. Stewart (2008), "The Contribution Continuum," Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 36 (March), 157-165.
   Google Scholar
• MacNealy, Mary Sue, Bruce W. Speck, and Noel Clements (1994), "Publishing in Technical Communication Journals from the Successful Author's Point of View," Technical Communication, 41 (2), 240-259.
   Google Scholar
• Mittal, Vikas, Lawrence Fieck, and Feisal Murshed (2008), "Publish and Prosper: The Financial Impact of Publishing by Marketing Faculty," Marketing Science, 27 (3), 430-442, 536, 538.
   Google Scholar
• Nairn, Agnes (2007), "Musings of a Double-Blind Peer Reviewer," International Journal of Advertising, 26 (2), 280-282.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, Douglas P., and Stephen J. Ceci (1980), "Manuscript Masquerade: How Well Does the Review Process Work?" Sciences, 20 (September), 16-19.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, Douglas P., and Stephen J. Ceci (1982), "Peer-Review Practices of Psychological Journals: The Fate of Published Articles, Submitted Again," Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5 (2), 187-252.
   Google Scholar
• Piette, Michael J., and Kevin L. Ross (1992), "A Study of the Publication of Scholarly Output in Economics Journals," Eastern Economic Journal, 18 (4), 429-436.
   Google Scholar
• Raab, Gillian, and Uma Moorthy (1998), "Editorial: Double-Blind Refereeing," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 161 (Part 2), 117-119.
   Google Scholar
• Searcy, DeWayne L., and John T. Mentzer (2003), "A Framework for Conducting and Evaluating Research," Journal of Accounting Literature, 22, 130-167.
   Google Scholar
• Sherrill, Daniel L., Joseph F. Hair Jr., and Mitch Griffin (1989), "Marketing Academicians' Perceptions of Ethical Research and Publishing Behavior," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 17 (4), 315-324.
   Google Scholar
• Snodgrass, Richard T. (2007a), "Editorial: Single-Versus Double-Blind Reviewing," ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 32 (1), 1-31.
   Google Scholar
• Snodgrass, Richard T. (2007b), "Single-Versus Double-Blind Reviewing: An Analysis of the Literature," ACM SIGMOD Record, 35 (3), 8-21.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, David W. (2002), "Getting Published: Reflections of an Old Editor," Journal of Marketing, 66 (4), 1-6.
   Google Scholar
• Summers, John O. (2001), "Guidelines for Conducting Research and Publishing in Marketing: From Conceptualization Through the Review Process," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29 (4), 405-415.
   Google Scholar
• Svensson, Göran (2006), "The Paradoxnoia of Top Marketing Journals," European Journal of Marketing, 40 (11-12), 1153-1168.
   Google Scholar
• Svensson, Göran, and Greg Wood (2007), "Research Criteria in Marketing Journals: AMJ, EJM and JM," Australasian Journal of Marketing, 15 (3), 83-93.
   Google Scholar
• Svensson, Göran, Terje Slåtten, Bård Tronvoll, and Thomas Helgesson (2008), "Empirical Characteristics of ‘Top’ Journals in Mainstream Marketing," Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 26 (2), 131-144.
   Google Scholar
• Tsang, Eric W. K., and Bruno S. Frey (2007), "The As-Is Journal Review Process: Let Authors Own Their Ideas," Academy of Management Learning and Education, 6 (1), 128-136.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, Timothy D., and Nancy Brekke (1994), "Mental Contamination and Mental Correction: Unwanted Influences on Judgments and Evaluations," Psychological Bulletin, 116 (1), 117-142.
   Google Scholar