Last week at our (i.e., Queen’s Smith School of Business) Graduate Student Symposium I had the honor of leading a discussion about publishing with about 25 grad students.  I was surprised again by how much knowledge I did not know that I had when students asked “the darndest questions!”

One of the best, was a question about editorial process differences.  As I answered the question I realized how varied the models are.  These include:

• How papers get assigned to editors by senior editors?
  • At random or by subject area/methodological area or by nomination of author
• How do reviewers get chosen?
  • By Editors or by the Senior Editor
• Who has final acceptance responsiblity de facto?
  • Editor or the Senior Editor or both
• How is the review process done?
  • Single blind (i.e. reviewer knows who author is) or Double blind (i.e. reviewer does not know who authors are) or at the call of the Editor
  • Are reviewers compensated and what does that do to their objectivity if anything?
• What are differences in editorial cycle turnaround times?
• What are differences in journal acceptance rates?

All of these are good things for doctoral students to know and for supervisors to pass on their knowledge about.