Refereeing the Game of Peer Review

Artikel

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.

Object Details

• Language: Englisch

References and Relationships

• Bibliographic citation: Journal: Academy of Management Learning & Education ; ISSN: 1944-9585 ; Volume: 7 ; Year: 2008 ; Issue: 1 ; Pages: 124-129 ; Briarcliff Manor, NY: Academy of Management

Classification and Topics

• Classification: Wirtschaft ; Professional Labor Markets; Occupational Licensing ; Personal, Professional, and Business Services ; Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility ; Personnel Economics: Training
• Subject: Peer review ; Professional autonomy ; Professional publication ; Academic freedom ; Peer control ; Professional development

Contributors, Places and Time

• Event: Geistige Schöpfung
• (who): Raelin, Joseph A.
• Event: Veröffentlichung
• (who): Academy of Management ; ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
• (where): Briarcliff Manor, NY
• (when): 2008

Further information

• DOI: https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amle.2008.31413869
• Handle: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/268492
• Last update: 10.03.2025, 11:44 AM CET