Musings on Accounting Research by Steve

Home » doctoral matters » Doctoral students say the most insightful things

Doctoral students say the most insightful things


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.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: