Premium
A Case for Adopting Appellate Review into AAEA Editorial Policy: Counterpoint
Author(s) -
Stefanou Spiro E.,
Brandt Jon A.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
applied economic perspectives and policy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.4
H-Index - 49
eISSN - 2040-5804
pISSN - 2040-5790
DOI - 10.1111/1467-9353.00116
Subject(s) - counterpoint , political science , law and economics , public administration , economics , sociology , pedagogy
Huffaker and Mittelhammer (H&M) argue for a formal appeal process for authors submitting manuscripts to an American Agricultural Economics Association (AAEA) publication for the cases where an author feels his/her manuscript was rejected for insufficient grounds. H&M maintain that in these cases, the editor necessarily becomes an advocate for one side in the adversarial process between authors and reviewers. They further contend that power in the final decision point is biased against the author when the editor is persuaded by a reviewer's negative (but erroneous) assessment. Given this imbalance of power, they conclude that the author is at a competitive disadvantage and should have some recourse to appeal a decision that is based on an incorrect reviewer evaluation, which the editor buys in to. H&M imply that the current system does not permit an author to question an editorial decision and seek redress. At present, authors who feel their manuscript received an unfair hearing at a journal have two options:1 asking for a reconsideration of the manuscript's suitability for publication, and taking the manuscript to another journal. H&M's suggestion for an appellate review board is a heavy-handed version of the option to a request to rereview. By not finding the remedy of requesting the editor to rereview the submission sufficiently acceptable, H&M's policy recommendation to institute an appellate review board suggests an editor cannot objectively handle an appeal, which questions the integrity of the editor. By not even mentioning the remedy to take a rejected manuscript to another publication outlet, H&M imply this remedy is an inferior option which begs the question, why is making sure a particular submission gets accepted into the specific AAEA publication in question so important?