RE: Journal response times

2002-10-14 Thread fabio guillermo rojas
My original statement was not about about time to publication, but "turn around" time - ie, the time it takes to return a manuscript to author with referee comments. I opined that "turn around" time for well staffed journals was in the 3-6 month range for the faster social sciences, but much long

RE: Journal response times

2002-10-14 Thread William Dickens
I wouldn't if I were you. My submission to Psych Review with a revision took 14 months from submission till it appeared in print. I've never made it into print in a refereed economics journal in less than 18 months and more typical times are 2 to 3 year. Oh yes. And the editor of Psych Review was

Re: (book review)The Case against Government Science

2002-10-14 Thread AdmrlLocke
In a message dated 10/14/02 4:32:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > With the widespread intrusion of the federal government into the lives and > business of everyone, it might be fruitful to consider a spectrum of research > spanni

RE: Journal response times

2002-10-14 Thread fabio guillermo rojas
> "The data are average times (measured in months) > between initial submission and acceptance at various > economics journals in the year 1999." > > It seems that the long times quoted in this article > are something different than what fabio was talking > about. I have not read the article bu

Re: (book review)The Case against Government Science

2002-10-14 Thread Alypius Skinner
- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > With the widespread intrusion of the federal government into the lives and > business of everyone, it might be fruitful to consider a spectrum of research > spanning the gamut from purely private to purely governmental rather than > conside

RE: Journal response times

2002-10-14 Thread Ben Powell
"Robson, Alex" wrote: "The data are average times (measured in months) between initial submission and acceptance at various economics journals in the year 1999." It seems that the long times quoted in this article are something different than what fabio was talking about. I have not read the ar

Re: Journal response times

2002-10-14 Thread William Sjostrom
I haven't had a chance to actually look at Ellison's paper, but a quick observation. A few years ago, the AER raised the submission fee substantially because, it said, the old fee of $10 was so low that people were sending papers in way too early just because AER refereeing was a cheap source of

Re: Journal response times

2002-10-14 Thread Chris Macrae
Unfortunately every journal is a walking disaster area because of one fundamental disease. Which in our era of great change could just about wipe human beings off the planet CURE Papers should be in two sections requiring totally different refereeing procedures: -this is purely trying to go dee