32.1 Review at JM
For data replication submission, read here
For detail, read here
JM articles should have:
New knowledge
Real-world marketing topics and problems (i.e., relevance to stakeholders)
Validity (i.e., good approximation of the truth)
Expected quality review process:
Fairness
Reviewers should have reasonable knowledge
No conflicts of interests
Consistency
- Interesting and important
- Empirical rigor
- Conceptual rigor
- Relevance
- Constructive
- Risk-taking
Not a vote-counting exercise (i.e., number of rejections from reviewers)
Responsible
Respect author’s original objective
Explain fatal flaws
Privacy
Timely: reviewers (three weeks after the review invitation) and AEs (within two weeks)
Roadmap
Format
2 single-spaced pages
reviewers number their comments.
Suggested structure:
A short synopsis of the paper and its findings
Evaluate the contribution: Suggestions to improve contribution(if needed)
Identify major strengths, weaknesses, recommendations regarding
conceptual
empirical
Readability
Minor comments and suggestions