I agree that the practice is sound, and typical, for a revise and
resubmit.  When I said it was a bad idea, I was thinking of an original
submission.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dunfee, Thomas
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 9:14 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Question

Every major journal that I have reviewed for (AMR, Journal of Marketing,
ASQ) and others (now the BEQ - just got one yesterday) send a reviewer
an anonymous copy of the other reviews when you are reviewing a revise
and resubmit.  It is necessary because the author(s) is responding to
all of the reviewers.  It also helps one to see whether one is doing the
same quality of job as the typical reviewer for that journal.  I have
even responded (indirectly) to other reviewers in writing up a revise
and resubmit. 

Thus, I believe it is (a) standard practice with A level journals and
(b) necessary.



Thomas W. Dunfee
Kolodny Professor of Social Responsibility
Chair, Department of Legal Studies and Business Ethics
The Wharton School
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104
215-898-7691
 
-----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 9:45 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
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