Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/268492 
Year of Publication: 
2008
Citation: 
[Journal:] Academy of Management Learning & Education [ISSN:] 1944-9585 [Volume:] 7 [Issue:] 1 [Publisher:] Academy of Management [Place:] Briarcliff Manor, NY [Year:] 2008 [Pages:] 124-129
Publisher: 
Academy of Management, Briarcliff Manor, NY
Abstract: 
In this dialogue, the author depicts the journal peer review process as a high-stakes game involving three parties: editor, reviewer, and author. In light of a non-infrequent transposition of what should have been a constructive professional development process into a self-promotional social process, critiques of peer review have abounded, such as the "as-is" process recently recommended by Eric Tsang and Bruno Frey in this journal. While the "as-is" process highlights and potentially remedies some of the abuses of the system, there may be less radical options through professional education and development to preserve the critical developmental function of peer review.
Subjects: 
Peer review
Professional autonomy
Professional publication
Academic freedom
Peer control
Professional development
JEL: 
J44
L84
M14
M53
Published Version’s DOI: 
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Accepted Manuscript (Postprint)
Appears in Collections:

Files in This Item:
File
Size
168.34 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.