Welcome to Revise and Resubmit, the podcast where we take a deep dive into the world of cutting-edge research—one paper at a time.
Today, we’re exploring a fascinating editorial from the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, a prestigious FT50 journal that stands among the world’s top business publications. Written by Mark B. Houston and John Hulland, this piece challenges the traditional role of peer reviewers, urging them to think less like gatekeepers and more like developmental coaches.
Picture this: a songwriter nervously steps onto the stage of Songland, hoping to refine their melody with the guidance of industry experts. Now, imagine replacing the songwriter with a researcher and the industry experts with journal reviewers. That’s the vision Houston and Hulland lay out—where feedback is not about tearing down but building up, not about rejection but refinement.
But here’s the question—can shifting the culture of peer review really lead to stronger, more innovative research? Or are we too entrenched in old habits to embrace this change?
A special thank you to the authors, Mark B. Houston and John Hulland, and to Springer Nature for publishing this thought-provoking editorial.
If you enjoy deep dives into top-tier research, make sure to subscribe to Revise and Resubmit on Spotify, Amazon Prime, Apple Podcasts, and YouTube at Weekend Researcher. Your next big insight might just be one episode away!
Reference
Houston, Mark B., and John Hulland. "Reviewers as developmental coaches." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 49 (2021): 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-020-00747-x
Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/@weekendresearcher
Support us on Patreon
https://patreon.com/weekendresearcher
