Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAdler, Ralph Wen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorLiyanarachchi, Gregory Aen_NZ
dc.date.available2011-04-07T03:22:52Z
dc.date.copyright2010-02-06en_NZ
dc.identifier.citationAdler, R. W., & Liyanarachchi, G. A. (2010). An empirical examination of the editorial review processes of accounting journals (Accountancy Working Paper Series). Accountancy & Business Law. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10523/1577en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10523/1577
dc.description.abstractThis study examines the editorial review processes of 40 main English-language accounting journals. It reports findings for individual journals, as well as clusters of journals that have been categorized by the geographical region of their editorial offices and functional specialty. A survey-based study was used. Authors who had papers accepted at one of the 40 accounting journals during the period 2004-2005 were asked to comment on their experiences with the editorial review process. The authors were also separately asked to comment on the editorial review process of a journal in which they received their most recent manuscript rejection. As the present study reveals, while the editorial review processes of accounting journals are generally rated quite high, there are particular journals and clusters of journals that stand out from the rest.en_NZ
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherAccountancy & Business Lawen_NZ
dc.relation.ispartofseriesAccountancy Working Paper Seriesen_NZ
dc.subjectJournal qualityen_NZ
dc.subjecteditorial review processesen_NZ
dc.subjectpeer reviewen_NZ
dc.subject.lcshHF Commerceen_NZ
dc.subject.lcshHF5601 Accountingen_NZ
dc.subject.lcshHF5601 Accountingen_NZ
dc.titleAn empirical examination of the editorial review processes of accounting journalsen_NZ
dc.typeWorking Paperen_NZ
dc.description.versionUnpublisheden_NZ
otago.bitstream.pages54en_NZ
otago.date.accession2010-04-21 00:51:32en_NZ
otago.schoolAccountancy and Business Lawen_NZ
otago.openaccessOpen
otago.place.publicationDunedin, New Zealanden_NZ
dc.identifier.eprints881en_NZ
otago.school.eprintsAccountancy & Business Lawen_NZ
dc.description.referencesBailey, C. D., Hermanson, D. R. and Louwers, T.J. 2006. An Examination of the Peer Review Process in Accounting. Proceedings, Canadian Accounting Association (CAAA),Annual Conference. Black, P. and Wiliam, D. 1998. Inside the Black Box. Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment ,October: 139-148. Bonner, S. E., Hesford, J. W., Van der Stede, W. A., and Young, M. S. 2006. The most influential journals in academic accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society 31: 663-685. Brinn, T., Jones, M. J., and Pendlebury, M. 1996. UK Accountants’ perceptions of research journal quality. Accounting and Business Research 26 (3): 265-278. Brown, R., Jones, M. and Steele, T 2007. Still flickering at the margins of existence? Publishing patterns and themes in accounting and finance research over the last two decades. The British Accounting Review 39: 125-151. Hattie, J. 1999. Influences on student learning. Inaugural Lecture: Professor of Education, University of Auckland, 2 August. Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. 2007. The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 77 (1): 81-112. Hull, R. P. and Wright, G. B. 1990. Faculty perceptions of journal quality: An update. Accounting Horizons March: 77-98. Ingenhamp, K. 1986. The Possible Effects of Various Reporting Methods on Learning Outcomes. Studies in Education Evaluation 12: 341-360. Jones, M. J. and Roberts, R. 2005. International publishing patterns: An investigation of leading UK and US accounting and finance journals. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 32 (5&6): 1107-1140. Jönsson, S. 2006. On academic writing, European Business Review 18 (6): 479-490. Lowe, A. and Locke, J. 2005. Perceptions of journal quality and research paradigm: results of a web-based survey of British accounting academics. Accounting,Organizations and Society 30: 81-98. Lowe, A. and Locke, J. 2006. Constructing an ‘efficient frontier’ of accounting Journal quality. The British Accounting Review 38: 321-341. Olson, M. and Raffeld, P. 1987. The Effects of Written Comments on the Quality of Student Compositions and the Learning of Content. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly 8: 273-293. Department of Accountancy and Business Law, Working paper series No. 6 February 2010 Mozier, P. 2009. Publishing in accounting journals: A fair game? Accounting, Organizations and Society 34:285-304. Reinstein A, Calderon T G 2006. Examining accounting departments’ rankings of the quality of accounting journals. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 17(4): 457- 490. Starbuck, W. H. 2005. How much better are the most-prestigious journals? The statistics of academic publication. Organization Science 16 (2): 180-200. Swanson, E.P. 2004. Publishing in the majors: A comparison of accounting, finance, management and marketing. Contemporary Accounting Research 21 (1): 223-255.en_NZ
 Find in your library

Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record