THE MANUSCRIPT REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.

Peer review and editorial decision-making processes were examined for manuscripts submitted to the American Sociological Review between 1977 and 1981. Authors' professional characteristics, manuscript characteristics, review procedures, and referees' recommendations accounted for more than 58 percent of the variance in the editors' final decisions. Authors' professional characteristics had little effect. Manuscripts reporting qualitative data analysis were less likely to receive favorable recommendations from referees. Assigning editors had considerable influence via the recommendations of the referees they selected. Averaged recommendations of peer referees and the number of revisions accounted for the most variance in the editors' final decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of American Sociological Review is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)