Why Referees Reject Manuscripts

McKercher, Bob; Law, Rob; Weber, Karin; Song, Haiyan; Hsu, Cheng

doi:10.1177/1096348007302355

Cited by 50 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 1 Table 1 are listed in descending order of the average number of citations per year. Law, Weber, Song, & Hsu, 2007), but the ISI impact factors for these journals were less than 1. Using the ISI impact factor to evaluate the quality of a tourism journal is, therefore, simply not useful.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 93%

An Analysis of the Most Influential Articles Published in Tourism Journals From 2000 to 2007: A Google Scholar Approach

Law¹,

Ye²,

Wei³

et al. 2009

Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research note reports a study that analyzed the 100 most influential articles, which is operationalized as the most cited publications published in tourism journals from 2000 to 2007. A Google Scholar-based software system was developed in Java to retrieve the citation information. The empirical findings show that 10.16% of the citations were from Institute for Scientific Information-listed (ISI) journals, and that 71.64% of them were from neither ISI nor tourism journals. The most popular topics covered by these articles were psychology and tourist behavior, followed by destination image and marketing. This article contributes to the literature by providing an alternative means of assessing the impact of research into tourism.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 93%

An Analysis of the Most Influential Articles Published in Tourism Journals From 2000 to 2007: A Google Scholar Approach

Law¹,

Ye²,

Wei³

et al. 2009

Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Peer review is considered integral to scientific publishing (Yuksel, 2003;McKercher, Law, Weber, Song, & Hsu, 2007). For appropriate screening and the selecting of the right manuscript for the journal it is an indispensable part of scholarly activities (Kassirer & Campion, 1994).…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rejection of a scientific paper is the norm rather than exception in academia (McKercher, Law, Weber, Song, & Hsu, 2007). Respected top-ranking journals employ robust review processes and hence accept far fewer manuscripts than they reject, in many cases they accept 10-15% of manuscripts with 70-80% rejected at initial review stage (desk rejection) (Straub, Ang & Evaristo, 1994;Daft, 1995;Summers, 2001), whereas less prestigious journals have higher rates of acceptance (McKercher, Law, Weber, Song, & Hsu, 2007).…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Being published in reputable academic and scientific journals: Key criteria for acceptance

Datta¹,

Jones²

2018

IJHEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:In scholarly journal publication, blind peer review has become an integral part of the process that helps maintain the standard and quality of academic papers that are accepted for publication. The main purpose of this study was to understand the reasons for the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript by analysing the reviewers' comments based on the ratings on eight specific areas of concern and their written comments. Research method:The study was based on a content analysis of 248 reviewers' comments for a total of 160 manuscripts. These papers were submitted to an academic journal between September 2017 and February 2018. 62 reviewers' comments were analysed for 32 manuscripts that were accepted, and 186 reviewers' comments were analysed for the 93 papers that were rejected. The reasons for desk rejections were analysed for the remaining 35 manuscripts. Findings:The study has identified the most important reasons for acceptance based on their rating and these are: adequacy of literature review, research methodology/study design, structure of the paper, quality of the writing, quality of the problem formulation, discussions and conclusions, findings and quality of analysis, importance/relevance, title & abstract and research contribution to the body of knowledge. The main reasons for rejections are: poor discussion & conclusions section, substandard quality of writing, poorly structured paper, weak study design/methodological issues, lack of research gap, poorly developed literature review among others.Conclusion: Structural problems are one of the most salient issues for the manuscript. While the context of the manuscripts is generally reasonably well developed, many authors seemed to overlook or ignore areas such as use of the English language, accurate punctuation, structure of the paper that includes poorly developed tables, figures and diagrams, inappropriate citation and list of references, unsuitable research instruments and poorly developed critical review of literature.Originality/value-The study is original and contributes to the body of knowledge as it provides insight into reasons for acceptance and rejection of a manuscript based on the contentment analysis of 160 manuscripts. This will provide guidelines to the authors with valuable information on the ways in which they can develop their manuscripts with a view to increasing the likelihood of acceptance by a peer reviewed scholarly journal.

show abstract

“…In line with methodological advancement in the general marketing research, tourism researchers can promote multilevel analysis (e.g., hierarchical linear modeling), which enables researchers to test existing theories at different levels (Wieseke, Lee, Broderick, Dawson, & van Dick, 2008). Authors, however, should understand that the most important determinant of publication in a first-tier journal is the insight from the data shed on a topic, but not about the statistical techniques (McKercher, Law, Weber, Song, & Hsu, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity in Statistical Research Techniques: An Analysis of Refereed Research Articles in theJournal of Travel & Tourism MarketingBetween 1992 and 2010

Lee

Law

2012

Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports the findings of a study that analyzes the statistical methods used in articles published in the Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing (JTTM) in the period 1992-2010. A content analysis of 462 articles identified 68 different statistical methods, grouped into 17 categories.Factor analysis and ANOVA/MANOVA were the most commonly used methods, following descriptive statistics. There was a substantial increase in the use of structural equation modeling (SEM) in recently published papers. While a diverse range of statistical methods was used in the articles studied, their application was somewhat unbalanced. More use of multivariate statistical methods for further development of the travel and tourism marketing field is thus proposed. This article is of use to readers seeking to understand the development of statistical methods in travel and tourism marketing research, using JTTM as a case study.

show abstract

Why Referees Reject Manuscripts

Cited by 50 publications

References 21 publications

An Analysis of the Most Influential Articles Published in Tourism Journals From 2000 to 2007: A Google Scholar Approach

An Analysis of the Most Influential Articles Published in Tourism Journals From 2000 to 2007: A Google Scholar Approach

Being published in reputable academic and scientific journals: Key criteria for acceptance

Diversity in Statistical Research Techniques: An Analysis of Refereed Research Articles in theJournal of Travel & Tourism MarketingBetween 1992 and 2010

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About