Reference health

Submit-to-Accept Delays in Accounting: Determinants and Comparisons to Other Business Disciplines

https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4236551
CiteStamped reference-health badge
37/37 checkable references clean · checked 2026-08-25

Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.

10 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.

The 37 checked references that resolve
resolves10.2308/iace-50467
A Model of Individual Accounting Faculty Salaries
resolves10.1108/03068290410518247
Rejections and the importance of first response times
resolves10.1287/mnsc.2013.1755
Matthew: Effect or Fable?
resolves10.1073/pnas.1719557115
The Matthew effect in science funding
resolves10.1016/j.aos.2005.06.003
The most influential journals in academic accounting
resolves10.1287/mnsc.1100.1281
Organizing Contests for Status: The Matthew Effect vs. the Mark Effect
resolves10.2308/accr.2005.80.1.55
The Importance of Circulating and Presenting Manuscripts: Evidence from the Accounting Literature
resolves10.2308/iace.2007.22.3.411
On Using Journal Rank to Proxy for an Article's Contribution or Value
resolves10.2308/iace.2010.25.4.631
Accounting Program Research Rankings by Topical Area and Methodology
resolves10.1038/206233a0
The Scientific Foundations of Science Policy
resolves10.1086/341871
Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A <i>q</i>‐<i>r</i> Theory
resolves10.1086/341868
The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process
resolves10.2308/iace.2006.21.3.195
Publication Records of Faculty Promoted at the Top 75 Accounting Research Programs
resolves10.2308/iace-50140
Publication Benchmarking Data Based on Faculty Promoted at the Top 75 U.S. Accounting Research Institutions
resolves10.3386/w26614
Is Scholarly Refereeing Productive (at the Margin)?
resolves10.5465/amj.2002.9265944
From the Editors
resolves10.1093/rfs/hhu093
Editorial: Cosmetic Surgery in the Academic Review Process
resolves10.1073/pnas.2205779119
Nobel and novice: Author prominence affects peer review
resolves10.2308/jata.2004.26.s-1.143
Reviewing the Review Process
resolves10.2308/accr.2009.84.6.2047
Annual Report and Editorial Commentary for The Accounting Review
resolves10.1257/0002828053828608
Are Delays in Academic Publishing Necessary?
resolves10.1126/science.159.3810.56
The Matthew Effect in Science
resolves10.1086/354848
The Matthew Effect in Science, II: Cumulative Advantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property
resolves10.1016/j.aos.2008.08.003
Publishing in accounting journals: A fair game?
resolves10.2308/HORIZONS-2021-023
Publication Benchmarking Data Based on Faculty Promoted at the Top 200 Worldwide Accounting Research Institutions
resolves10.2308/acch-51271
Has Concentration in the Top Accounting Journals Changed Over Time?
resolves10.1098/rsif.2014.0378
The Matthew effect in empirical data
resolves10.1017/S0140525X00011183
Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again
resolves10.1017/S0140525X00075506
Interpersonal expectancy effects: the first 345 studies
resolves10.2308/jfir-51406
<i>Journal of Financial Reporting</i> Inaugural Issue: Defining Our Content
resolves10.1287/mnsc.2017.3019
From the Editor
resolves10.1287/mnsc.2020.3926
From the Editor
resolves10.1093/rfs/hhs052
Reviewing Less—Progressing More
resolves10.1506/RCKM-13FM-GK0E-3W50
Publishing in the Majors: A Comparison of Accounting, Finance, Management, and Marketing*
resolves10.1506/car.24.4.9
Concentration in Publishing at Top‐Tier Business Journals: Evidence and Potential Explanations*
resolves10.1073/pnas.1707323114
Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review
resolves10.2308/acch-51443
Comparing the Publication Process in Accounting, Economics, Finance, Management, Marketing, Psychology, and the Natural Sciences
The 10 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedThe impact of publication outlet and research reputation on accounting faculty salaries
no DOI — not checkedref8
no DOI — not checkedref10
no DOI — not checkedref20
no DOI — not checkedref25
no DOI — not checkedSocioeconomic roots of academic faculty
no DOI — not checkedAre publication requirements for accounting faculty promotions still increasing?
no DOI — not checkedref36
no DOI — not checkedref46
no DOI — not checkedref47
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings, or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.

checked 2026-08-25 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record

Embed this badge

Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.

<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.4236551"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.4236551/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[![CiteStamped reference-health badge](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.4236551/badge.svg)](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.4236551)