IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/abg/anprac/v20y2016i41181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Analysis of Why Papers Are Rejected in Management Journals of Different Strata

Author

Listed:
  • Manuel Portugal Ferreira
  • Christian Falaster

Abstract

The publication of scientific articles is one of the requirements imposed on Brazilian researchers and contributes decisively to their reputation, mobility and financial benefits. To assess the quality of publications, Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) created the Qualis system, that classifies journals into eight levels - A1 (highest) to C (lowest) - inferring the quality of the articles from the strata of the journals in which they are published. This article examines the flaws and gaps that represent factors for rejecting articles submitted to management journals, comparing the motives for rejection between journals from different strata. Methodologically, we conducted an empirical study with data obtained by questionnaire from 82 editors of Brazilian management journals. Contrary to expectations, the results do not point to clear differences in the factors that lead to rejection between journals from different strata. This article has contributions and implications for researchers, publishers and regulators. In particular, the thoughtful reader can identify the most frequent problems and gaps and be more prepared to produce better articles for future submissions.

Suggested Citation

  • Manuel Portugal Ferreira & Christian Falaster, 2016. "A Comparative Analysis of Why Papers Are Rejected in Management Journals of Different Strata," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 20(4), pages 412-433.
    • Handle: RePEc:abg:anprac:v:20:y:2016:i:4:1181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rac.anpad.org.br/index.php/rac/article/view/1181/1177
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://rac.anpad.org.br/index.php/rac/article/download/1181/1177
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:abg:anprac:v:20:y:2016:i:4:1181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Information Technology of ANPAD (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://anpad.org.br .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.