Abstract
In response to the increasing difficulty of obtaining high quality peer reviews, our invited paper describes the concept of review avoidance and why this phenomenon occurs. In reaffirming the professional responsibilities and potential benefits of reviewing, we also emphasize the interdependent nature of the ideal peer review process. We suggest that the review process is a three-way street where the respective roles and responsibilities of authors, editors and editorial teams, and reviewers are inextricably linked. We present thematic illustrations of undesirable reviewer comments, and a brief synthesis of broad themes in the literature on high-quality reviewing. The synthesis is complemented by a master reviewer’s fine-grained perspective on crafting high quality reviews. A final Appendix presents additional sources that may be informative for prospective reviewers, submitting authors, and those mentors and colleagues who may wish to provide guidance and training to them.
Description
This article is published by SAGE under a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Publisher
SAGE
Date of publication
6-2023
Language
english
Persistent identifier
http://hdl.handle.net/10950/4402
Document Type
Article
Recommended Citation
Ellinger, Andrea D.; Johnson, Patrik; Chapman, Karen; and Ellinger, Alexander E., "The Ideal Review Process Is a Three-Way Street" (2023). Human Resource Development Faculty Publications and Presentations. Paper 42.
http://hdl.handle.net/10950/4402