You submitted your paper, the peer reviews are back, and the editors have extended to you an invitation to "Revise and Resubmit" (R&R). What do you do now?
Most academic journals rarely designate a specific method by which authors should respond to an R&R request, leaving the process up to tacit knowledge shared from one author to another. And while this informal transfer of knowledge is useful, understanding best-practices for the R&R process can enhance an author's chances of receiving a favorable response, while streamlining the process for editors and reviewers who must make the final decision.
Please join us for a PDW to learn more about these best-practices, as identified by the editors and associate editors of journals such as Academy of Management Perspectives, Group and Organization Management, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Business and Psychology, Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and Organizational Research Methods.
During the PDW, each panelist will outline their expectations, addressing such topics as analyzing peer reviews, responding to reviews, and methods that are more likely to generate a positive outcome from the process. They will then respond to audience questions regarding reviewer comments during the R&R process, before concluding with a working session with groups of participants to develop such skills as identifying the most important comments to address and designing appropriate response letters.
All are welcome and no pre-registration is required. We hope to see you in Boston!
Session Type: PDW Workshop Program Session: 402 | Submission: 14009 | Sponsor(s): (OB, HR, STR) Scheduled: Saturday, Aug 10 2019 12:15PM - 2:15PM at Sheraton Boston Hotel in Constitution Ballroom B
Congratulations, You Got A Revise And Resubmit! Now What?
Organizer: Gretchen Vogelgesang Lester, San Jose State U.
Organizer: Rachel Clapp-Smith, Purdue U. Northwest
Organizer: Jane Shumski Thomas, Purdue U. Northwest
Organizer: Michelle Hammond, Oakland U.
Organizer: Ravi S. Ramani, Purdue U. Northwest
Presenter: Paul Bliese, Darla Moore School of Business, U. of South Carolina
Presenter: William L. Gardner, Texas Tech U.
Presenter: Susanna Khavul, UTA/LSE
Participant Presenter: Sandy Hershcovis, U. of Calgary
Presenter: Michael E. Palanski, Rochester Institute of Technology
Presenter: Sabine Sonnentag, U. of Mannheim
This year will be the 7th iteration of this Professional Development Workshop, which has seen attendance at full capacity in 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. This workshop is intended for (1) authors who have successfully passed the first round of peer review for article publication and (2) reviewers for the top journals across disciplines. We continue to receive positive feedback from participants, who report the content to be beneficial to their career development. The panelists represent editors and associate editors from journals including the Journal of Applied Psychology, Organizational Research Methods, Academy of Management Perspectives, and others. This year's design will focus on teaching authors the skills necessary for successful navigation of the Revise and Resubmit process, highlighting effective methods for identifying the most important reviewer comments and approaches to crafting a response letter. Each panelist will discuss best practices regarding successful revise and resubmit processes learned throughout their careers as authors, reviewers, and editors. In addition, each panelist will share thoughts regarding evaluating first round peer reviews, indicators authors should regard as positive or negative signals (red flags), and recommendations for how authors should respond. Each panelist will detail action steps, including requirements for reviewers of these journals. After these opening remarks, the organizers will open the floor for discussions regarding comments participants have received from reviewers. The session will conclude with specific guidelines of best practices for both authors and reviewers to help make the R&R process more efficient and more effective.