Peer Review and Research Impact

被引:0
|
作者
Girish Mallapragada
Nandini Lahiri
Atul Nerkar
机构
[1] Indiana University,Department of Marketing, Kelley School of Business
[2] Temple University,Fox School of Business
[3] The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,Department of Strategy and Entrepreneurship, Kenan
关键词
Peer review process; Research impact; Negative binomial models;
D O I
10.1007/s40547-015-0060-1
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In academia, citations received by articles are a critical metric for measuring research impact. An important aspect of publishing in academia is the ability of the authors to navigate the review process, and despite its critical role, very little is known about how the review process may impact the research impact of an article. We propose that characteristics of the review process, namely, number of revisions and time with authors during review, will influence the article’s research impact, post-publication. We also explore the moderating role of the authors’ social status on the relationship between the review process and the article’s success. We use a unique data set of 434 articles published in Marketing Science to test our propositions. After controlling for a host of factors, we find broad support for our propositions. We develop critical insights for researchers and academic administrators based on our findings.
引用
收藏
页码:29 / 41
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Impact: Take peer review into account
    E. Tobias Krause
    [J]. Nature, 2013, 503 : 198 - 198
  • [22] Impact of Alumni Connections on Peer Review Ratings and Selection Success Rate in National Research
    Jang, Duckhee
    Doh, Soogwan
    Kang, Gil-Mo
    Han, Dong-Seong
    [J]. SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & HUMAN VALUES, 2017, 42 (01) : 116 - 143
  • [23] Evaluating the Impact of Peer Review on the Completeness of Reporting in Imaging Diagnostic Test Accuracy Research
    Kazi, Sakib
    Frank, Robert A.
    Salameh, Jean-Paul
    Fabiano, Nicholas
    Absi, Marissa
    Pozdnyakov, Alex
    Islam, Nayaar
    Korevaar, Daniel A.
    Cohen, Jeremie F.
    Bossuyt, Patrick M.
    Leeflang, Mariska M. G.
    Cobey, Kelly D.
    Moher, David
    Schweitzer, Mark
    Menu, Yves
    Patlas, Michael
    McInnes, Matthew D. F.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2022, 56 (03) : 680 - 690
  • [24] Peer Review of Lectures: a Durable Impact?
    McLeod P.
    Steinert Y.
    Capek R.
    Chalk C.
    Barnett B.
    [J]. Medical Science Educator, 2015, 25 (2) : 105 - 106
  • [25] COMMON PROBLEMS THAT IMPACT PEER REVIEW
    Anderson, Rozalyn
    [J]. INNOVATION IN AGING, 2022, 6 : 110 - 110
  • [26] Impact: take peer review into account
    Krause, E. Tobias
    [J]. NATURE, 2013, 503 (7475) : 198 - 198
  • [27] A new forum for research on research integrity and peer review
    Stephanie L. Harriman
    Maria K. Kowalczuk
    Iveta Simera
    Elizabeth Wager
    [J]. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1 (1)
  • [28] EFL Students' Peer Review Validity: an Experiential Research on an Online Writing and Peer Review System
    Wang Mingchao
    Zhang Fuhui
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH NORTHEAST ASIA INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON LANGUAGE, LITERATURE AND TRANSLATION, 2016, : 796 - 801
  • [29] Faculty peer review of teaching taskforce: A quantitative descriptive research study for the peer review process
    Jenkins, Emerald
    D'Aoust, Rita
    Elias, Sabrina
    Han, Hae Ra
    Sharps, Phyllis
    Alvarez, Carmen
    [J]. NURSE EDUCATION TODAY, 2021, 106
  • [30] Truncating agency: Peer review and participatory research
    Barton, AC
    Johnson, V
    [J]. RESEARCH IN SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2002, 32 (02) : 191 - 214