Los puntos clave no están disponibles para este artículo en este momento.
Rejection rates for scholarly journals show substantial variation between disciplines. Explanations of this variation have focused on two possible sources: variation in consensus and in space shortages. Longitudinal data on journal rejection rates show that they have been very stable over time and are largely unaffected by changes in submissions, impugning the argument that space shortages explain disciplinary variation in rejection rates. In contrast, a model of the manuscript-evaluation process can account for the observed variation in rejection rates and also casts light on additional characteristics of manuscript evaluation processes in different disciplines as well. Possible links between consensus and each of the elements of the model are discussed.
Lowell L. Hargens (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: