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.