The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Strategies for revising and resubmitting papers to refereed journals

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.
1045-3172
89-101
Altman, Yochanan
bce7c8fc-4848-4b4d-a30a-889ac4550817
Baruch, Yehuda
25b89777-def4-4958-afdc-0ceab43efe8a
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), pp. 89-101. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2007.00542.x).

Record type: Article

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.

Full text not available from this repository.

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
ORCID for Yehuda Baruch: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-0678-6273

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 10 Sep 2013 11:29
Last modified: 18 Jul 2017 03:38

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Yochanan Altman
Author: Yehuda Baruch ORCID iD

University divisions

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

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×