Strategies for revising and resubmitting papers to refereed journals
Strategies for revising and resubmitting papers to refereed journals
We explored what authors allegedly do and why, when invited to revise and resubmit manuscripts to refereed journals. Based on responses from 249 business and management scholars from the UK and USA, we found that authors preferred to resubmit to the original journal, whether the required revision was minor or major, and that under certain circumstances other options would be considered: submitting to alternative journals, sometimes without revising at all; discarding the paper; or challenging the editor. Experience in publishing was found to be an important moderator. As to ‘why’ they purport to do so, a classification of qualitative responses yielded a matrix of four optional strategies, grouped along two axes: rationale (instrumental reasoning versus ethical reasoning) and agency (individually centred reasoning versus community-centred reasoning). Most responses were located in the instrumental/self-centred quadrant.
89-101
Altman, Yochanan
bce7c8fc-4848-4b4d-a30a-889ac4550817
Baruch, Yehuda
25b89777-def4-4958-afdc-0ceab43efe8a
March 2008
Altman, Yochanan
bce7c8fc-4848-4b4d-a30a-889ac4550817
Baruch, Yehuda
25b89777-def4-4958-afdc-0ceab43efe8a
Altman, Yochanan and Baruch, Yehuda
(2008)
Strategies for revising and resubmitting papers to refereed journals.
British Journal of Management, 19 (1), .
(doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2007.00542.x).
Abstract
We explored what authors allegedly do and why, when invited to revise and resubmit manuscripts to refereed journals. Based on responses from 249 business and management scholars from the UK and USA, we found that authors preferred to resubmit to the original journal, whether the required revision was minor or major, and that under certain circumstances other options would be considered: submitting to alternative journals, sometimes without revising at all; discarding the paper; or challenging the editor. Experience in publishing was found to be an important moderator. As to ‘why’ they purport to do so, a classification of qualitative responses yielded a matrix of four optional strategies, grouped along two axes: rationale (instrumental reasoning versus ethical reasoning) and agency (individually centred reasoning versus community-centred reasoning). Most responses were located in the instrumental/self-centred quadrant.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
e-pub ahead of print date: 11 September 2007
Published date: March 2008
Organisations:
Southampton Business School
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 356599
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/356599
ISSN: 1045-3172
PURE UUID: 4c48fb50-bf2c-4fa0-b878-7fd60edcefe9
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 10 Sep 2013 11:29
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:47
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Yochanan Altman
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics