A Field Guide for the Review Process
Writing and Responding to Peer Reviews
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 11624359 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Rajesh Bagchi (Pamplin College of Business, Virginia Polytechnic and State University Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA), Lauren Block (0000-0003-3464-3832, Baruch College), Rebecca W Hamilton (0000-0003-1515-4590, Georgetown University), Rebecca Hamilton (0000-0002-5443-8353, Georgetown University), Julie L Ozanne (0000-0002-5826-8259, The University of Melbourne, autor de correspondencia) |
| Editores | Darren Dahl, Eileen Fischer (0000-0002-8212-0414), Gita Johar, Vicki Morwitz |
| Año | 2016 |
| Volumen | 43 |
| Número | 5 |
| Páginas | 860-872 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2016-11-05 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Journal of Consumer Research (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0093-5301 • E-ISSN: 1537-5277 |
| Editorial | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/jcr/ucw066 |
| OpenAlex | W2555617487 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 1 |
| Referencias citadas | 14 |
The peer review process––both writing reviews for academic journals and responding to reviews of one’s own work––is fundamental to building scientific knowledge. In this article, we explain why you should invest time reviewing, how to write a constructive review, and how to respond effectively to reviews of your own work
Business · Constructive · Engineering ethics · Field (mathematics · Peer review · Political science · Process (computing · Scientific literature · Technical peer review · Work (physics · Work in process · Computer Science · Engineering · Marketing · Psychology · scientometrics and bibliometrics research
| Obras citantes distintas | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 0,25 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2022 - 2022 (1) |
| Velocidad de citación | historical |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 1 |