Publication of Research on Controversial Topics: The Early Acceptance Procedure

  title={Publication of Research on Controversial Topics: The Early Acceptance Procedure},
  author={J. Scott Armstrong},
Research with the potential to produce controversial findings is important to progress in the sciences. But scientific innovators often meet with resistance from the scientific community. Much anecdotal evidence has been provided about the reception accorded to researchers who have obtained controversial findings. While many of these cases occurred long ago (e.g., Copernicus and Galileo), the problem continues to the present. This problem has been addressed to some extent in that nearly all… Expand
What Are We Measuring When We Evaluate Journals?
This article undertakes two studies to examine issues related to journal rankings. Study 1 examines the consistency between journal rankings reported in past studies. It finds that while there isExpand
An Examination of the Globalisation of Authorship in Publishing in 20 Leading Marketing Journals
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the global contribution of academics to marketing literature between 1999 and 2003, based on an examination of the location of academics institutionExpand
Publishing in 20 leading marketing journals – an examination of global performance
Purpose of this paper was to examine the global contribution of academics to marketing literature between 1999 and 2003. This was done based on an examination of the location of academics institutionExpand
Biased Evaluation of Abstracts Depending on Topic and Conclusion: Further Evidence of a Confirmation Bias Within Scientific Psychology
The present paper investigated whether academic psychologists show a tendency to rate the quality and appropriateness of scientific studies more favorably when results and conclusions are consistentExpand
What Determines Time Spent in Peer Reviews? – Evidence from The Accounting Review
The existing empirical literature on the peer review process in general and in accounting in particular has primarily focused on the fairness of the process and reasons for rejections of submittedExpand
Publishing on publishing: streams in the literature
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose and examine streams in the literature related to academic publishing, with a focus on works in marketing. The content of the works within each themeExpand
Bias in the evaluation of psychology studies: A comparison of parapsychology versus neuroscience.
The results revealed that participants rated the neuroscience abstract as having stronger findings and as being more valid and reliable than the parapsychology abstract, despite the fact that the two abstracts were identical. Expand
A Model of the Editorial Process in Academic Journals
In this model, a journal editor maximizes his journal’s expected payoff from publishing high quality papers, net of costs due to (mistakenly) publishing low quality papers. Expand
Peer review and secrecy in the "Information Age"
This paper proposes a basic framework for secrecy and transparency as it relates to the peer review process of academic journals and examines some rationales given for the need for secrecy in peer review. Expand
Making Accounting Knowledge: Peering at Power
Abstract Academic accounting's gravitation toward the norms of the academy has included the incorporation of peer review practices as the primary means by which scholarship is accepted forExpand


Does the Need for Agreement Among Reviewers Inhibit the Publication of Controversial Findings?
Controversial empirical papers are expected to receive harsh treatment in peer review, but our survey indicates that such works occasionally get published, sometimes without much peer agreement. MoreExpand
Publish or Politic: Referee Bias in Manuscript Review1
To clarify the role of cognitive bias in manuscript review, designated more and less politically liberal area specialists and nonspecialists were sent either of two versions of a brief empiricalExpand
Are null results becoming an endangered species in marketing?
Editorial procedures in the social and biomedical sciences are said to promote studies that falsely reject the null hypothesis. This problem may also exist in major marketing journals. Of 692 papersExpand
The Predictive Ability of Peer Review of Grant Proposals: The Case of Ecology and the US National Science Foundation
Analyses of temporal correlations in measures of scientific productivity and quality suggest that individuals who have produced good science in the recent past will continue to do so in the nearExpand
Peerless Science: Peer Review and U. S. Science Policy
It's important for you to start having that hobby that will lead you to join in better concept of life and reading will be a positive activity to do every time. Expand
Psychology of Scientist: XXX. Credibility of Psychologists: An Empirical Study
In order to evaluate the effects of bias among psychologists, two virtually identical abstracts of presumably empirical research in the area of astrology were prepared, one with positive findings andExpand
A Proposal for a New Editorial Policy in the Social Sciences
Abstract “… there's this desert prison, see, with an old prisoner, resigned to his life, and a young one just arrived. The young one talks constantly of escape, and, after a few months, he makes aExpand
How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists
The authors asked the world's leading economists to describe instances in which journals rejected their articles. More than sixty essays, by a broadly diverse group that includes fifteen Nobel PrizeExpand
Error Measures for Generalizing About Forecasting Methods: Empirical Comparisons
This study evaluated measures for making comparisons of errors across time series. We analyzed 90 annual and 101 quarterly economic time series. We judged error measures on reliability, constructExpand
The evaluation of extrapolative forecasting methods
Examining how a forecasting method should be chosen based on analyzing alternative loss functions concludes that exponential smoothing and ‘naive’ models, previously thought to be ‘robust’ performers, forecast poorly for the particular set of time series under analysis, whatever error measure is used. Expand