A Model of the Editorial Process in Scientific Journals
69 Pages Posted: 15 Mar 2012 Last revised: 11 Jun 2014
Date Written: November 1, 2013
We theoretically analyze the editorial process in scientific journals. In our model, a journal editor maximizes his journal’s expected payoff from publishing high quality papers, net of costs due to (mistakenly) publishing low quality papers. The editor, with a prior probability assessment regarding paper quality, may choose to obtain additional costly evaluations from (one or two) referees. Referees are either "generalists" (neutral to the paper) or "experts," with more precise signals than generalists, but with a bias (positive or negative) toward the paper. We develop several policy implications for the editorial process in scientific journals and research grant proposal reviews.
Keywords: Editorial process; Peer review; Scientific journals; Entrepreneurial finance.
JEL Classification: A14; D83; L26; G24.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation