Since John Lynch’s presidential address at the 1998 annual meeting of the Association for Consumer Research (Lynch 1998), a large number of articles have appeared in the marketing literature pertaining to the review process in our field. Almost every new journal editor makes some statement about the standards and etiquette that reviewers should adopt during his or her editorial regime. For some good examples, see Shugan (2003), Desai (2011), and Kumar (2016). Other useful discussions of the review process also exist (e.g., Holbrook’s 1986 paper with seven suggestions for reviewers).
The purpose of this editorial is to give our perspective on (1) how the editorial process has evolved over time, (2) the importance and benefits of the review process to the marketing field, (3) how reviewing fits into career development, and (4) the characteristics of a good review. While it is inevitable that we will cover some ground that has already been tread by previous work, we hope that from the collective 90 years we have spent involved with the review process, we can add a useful perspective to a process that is often dreaded by both authors and reviewers.
Lehmann, Donald, and Russell Winer. "The Role and Impact of Reviewers on the Marketing Discipline." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 45, no. 5 (September 2017): 587-92.
Each author name for a Columbia Business School faculty member is linked to a faculty research page, which lists additional publications by that faculty member.
Each topic is linked to an index of publications on that topic.