Expectations and Perceptions of the Peer Review Process: A Study of Four Agricultural Economics Journals

Larry W. Van Tassell, Dan L. McLemore and Ronald K. Roberts
Authors registered in the RePEc Author Service: Larry W. VanTassell

Review of Agricultural Economics, 1992, vol. 14, issue 2, 241-254

Abstract: Understanding what agricultural economists look for when reviewing a manuscript is critical for publishing in refereed journals. Results are presented from a survey of authors and reviewers of four agricultural economics journals. Persistence was highlighted as a key factor in publication as was having a manuscript that was scientifically sound and well composed. Methodological sophistication rated low as a criterion used in the evaluation of manuscripts they reviewed, and while their comments were usually given as suggestions, the reviewers did expect authors to adequately respond to all suggestions.

Date: 1992
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1349503 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:revage:v:14:y:1992:i:2:p:241-254.

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Review of Agricultural Economics from Agricultural and Applied Economics Association Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ) and Christopher F. Baum ().