If I recall correctly, the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing and the
other marketing journals for which I review routinely send out the
editor's letter (blinded) to the reviewers with the other reviews.  In
this way, the first review is independent, but the reviewers get to see
if the editor adopted what they had to say and what other reviewers had
to say and whether the editor preferred their advice.  This can help
people become better reviewers and learn the quality level and features
being sought by the editor.    
If the paper comes back on a revise and resubmit, the past reviewer
comments are routinely sent with the revised paper and the author's
comments back to reviewers.  The original reviews are needed to
understand how the authors have responded.  

Ross D. Petty
Professor of Marketing Law
Babson College
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Allison
{allisonj}
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 4:15 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Question

I don't know about accounting, but I have reviewed manuscripts for the
Journal of Law & Economics and for Management Science.  Neither of them
provided me with other reviews.

Other than JLE (and ABLJ), I don't know about the practices of the
relatively few other peer-reviewed law journals, such as Journal of
Legal Studies (U. of Chicago, as is JLE), Journal of Law, Economics, &
Organizations (Berkeley, I believe), or the relatively new Journal of
Empirical Legal Studies (Cornell).

John

-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of sgunz
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 3:09 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Question

A colleague has suggested that there may be a difference between 
accounting and law disciplines here. Any of the law type editors know 
whether this is true? (tho' I must say, the person who raised the issue 
to begin with was an accounting/finance type).

Sally

[log in to unmask] wrote:

>
> I have been a reviewer for a number of Journals (most ALSB affiliated)

> and have frequently asked for anonymous copies of other reviewers 
> reports.  My reason was 1) to see whether I was seeing what others 
> were seeing; 2) to see the depth and quality of my peers work to 
> measure my own with, and 3) general curiosity and to learn from my 
> peers.  Although I've asked, I've never received any but have simply 
> been told that my reviews were fine and constant with the others 
> submitted.  They keep using me so I guess they have been fine and 
> consistent.  
>
> Michael A. Katz, J.D.
> Delaware State University
> Department of Accounting and Finance
> 1200 North DuPont Highway
> MBNA America Building, Rm 206 D
> Dover, DE 19901
> (302) 857-6918
> (302) 857-6924 (fax)
> <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> *sgunz <[log in to unmask]>*
> Sent by: "Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk" 
> <[log in to unmask]>
>
> 12/20/2005 09:45 AM
> Please respond to
> "Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk"             
>  <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> 	
> To
> 	[log in to unmask]
> cc 	
>
> 	
>
> 	
> Subject 	Question
>
>
>
> 	
>
>
>
>
>
> Quick question:
>
> When you review papers for journals, do you ever get a copy of the
other
> reviewer(s) review? Do you have any thoughts on the rights and wrongs
of
> this?
>
> I raise this issue as the Journal of Bus. Ethics has a file management
> system and I didn't realise that it allows reviewers access to the
other
> review and they are also sent it when the resubmit goes out. I hadn't
> realised this happened and had one reviewer really angry about it. The
> person at Springer was surprised by my request to change this. So I
said
> I would ask around to see what others think. Comments?
>
> Sally
>
>