Editor's Choice Editorial: Cosmetic Surgery in the Academic Review Process

David Hirshleifer

The Review of Financial Studies, 2015, vol. 28, issue 3, 637-649

Abstract: Has the academic review process become excessive? In a setting where editors cannot distinguish significant flaws from mere blemishes, reviewers recommend the repair of blemishes in order to acquire reputations for high skill. In equilibrium, editors accede to reviewer insistence upon such cosmetic surgery. If blemishes are sometimes unremovable, demands for repair sometimes block good papers from publication. This implies a social value to active editing. Reviewer signal-jamming may especially suppress innovative research and research designed to verify others' findings. This perspective strongly suggests that the growth of the review process is harmful. I therefore offer tentative proposals for reform.

Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rfs/hhu093 (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:rfinst:v:28:y:2015:i:3:p:637-649.

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

Access Statistics for this article

The Review of Financial Studies is currently edited by Itay Goldstein

More articles in The Review of Financial Studies from Society for Financial Studies Oxford University Press, Journals Department, 2001 Evans Road, Cary, NC 27513 USA.. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().