The Review Process at PSPB: Correlates of Interreviewer Agreement and Manuscript Acceptance

Abstract

Reviewer agreement and the predictors of publication judgments were investigated for first-submission manuscripts to the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin during a 3 1/2—year period (i.e., one editor’s tenure). Among the findings were the following: Reviewers’ judgments of manuscripts were multirather than unidimensional; reviewer agreement about methodology and overall recommendation was greater among high-prestige than mixed-prestige reviewers; authors with high prestige and authors with low professional experience submitted longer manuscripts than their counterparts; author prestige and text length were positively related to publication judgments of reviewers and editors; and author gender was related to editor’s decisions with female authors receiving less favorable decisions than males. The possible mediation of these findings and their implications for understanding the peer-review process in personality and social psychology are discussed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 61 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.