Scholarly Consensus and Journal Rejection Rates.

Rejection rates for scholarly journals show substantial variation between disciplines. Explanations of this variation have focused on two possible sources: variation in consensus and in space shortages. Longitudinal data on journal rejection rates show that they have been very stable over time and are largely unaffected by changes in submissions, impugning the argument that space shortages explain disciplinary variation in rejection rates. In contrast, a model of the manuscript-evaluation process can account for the observed variation in rejection rates and also casts light on additional characteristics of manuscript evaluation processes in different disciplines as well. Possible links between consensus and each of the elements of the model are discussed.

[1]  R. Merton.  Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. , 1957 .

[2]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[3]  W. Hagstrom.  The scientific community , 1966 .

[4]  R. Whitley.  The Formal Communication System of Science: A Study of the Organisation of British Social Science Journals , 1968 .

[5]  S. Goudsmit.  What happened to my paper , 1969 .

[6]  R. Merton,et al.  Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalisation, structure and functions of the referee system , 1971 .

[7]  R. G. Hawkins,et al.  What Economists Think of Their Journals , 1973, Journal of Political Economy.

[8]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[9]  N. Keyfitz.  How Do We Know the Facts of Demography , 1975 .

[10]  L. Hargens.  Patterns of scientific research: a comparative analysis of research in three scientific fields , 1976 .

[11]  C. J. Mullins.  A guide to writing and publishing in the social and behavioral sciences , 1977 .

[12]  Jeffrey Pfeffer,et al.  Paradigm Development and Particularism: Journal Publication in Three Scientific Disciplines , 1977 .

[13]  Daryl E. Chubin,et al.  Competence is Not Enough@@@Peer Review in the National Science Foundation: Phase one of a Study. , 1980 .

[14]  M. Gordon.  A study of the evaluation of research papers by primary journals in the UK , 1978 .

[15]  S. Oster,et al.  The Optimal Order for Submitting Manuscripts , 1980 .

[16]  S. Ceci,et al.  Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again , 1982, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[17]  Lowell L. Hargens,et al.  Scientific Consensus and Academic Status Attainment Patterns. , 1982 .

[18]  S. Woolgar,et al.  The Manufacture of Knowledge: an Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science , 1982 .

[19]  K. Knorr-Cetina.  The Manufacture of Knowledge: an Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science , 1985 .

[20]  Eunice Yvonne Bakanic.  Tracing Social Science: The Manuscript Review Process , 1986 .