Keywords

review process, publication process, reviewers, editors

Abstract

We update the Wood (2016) survey that gathered perceptions of academics regarding the review and publication process at the top academic journals to measure changes in perceptions over the last five years. We find that accounting academics generally perceive the overall process has not improved at top journals or has become worse since 2015. More specifically, we find that respondents think acceptance rates in top journals should nearly double. Respondents believe that reviewers and editors underweight practice relevance. They also believe reviewers overweight the criteria of incremental contribution, method, and rigor. Respondents believe that their institutions focus too much on publishing in top journals and that top journals favor certain topic areas and methodologies. We find that these opinions are held more strongly by new assistant professors than prior assistant professors, suggesting that the rising generation of scholars has stronger negative opinions about the review and publication process than a past generation.

Original Publication Citation

Burton, F. G., W. G. Heninger, S. L. Summers, and D. A. Wood. 2024. Perceptions of accounting academics on the review and publication process: An update and commentary. Issues in Accounting Education, 39 (1): 29-45. DOI: 10.2308/ISSUES-2021-085.

Document Type

Peer-Reviewed Article

Publication Date

2022

Publisher

Issues in Accounting Education

Language

English

College

Marriott School of Business

Department

Accountancy

University Standing at Time of Publication

Full Professor

Download

Included in

Accounting Commons

Share

COinS