Do Acceptance and Publication Times
Differ Across Finance Journals?
Craig W. Holden
Indiana University
For articles eventually published in the top twenty academic finance journals and top-
tier academic business journals, I examine the acceptance time (the time from first-
round submission to final-round acceptance) and online/print publication times (the
time from first-round submission to online/print publication). I find that the median
acceptance times of the top five general-interest finance journals are: Journal of
Financial Economics (9.9 months), Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis
(10.6 months), Review of Finance (11.7 months), Review of Financial Studies (15.5
months), and Journal of Finance (19.8 months). The three fastest in finance are
Review of Corporate Finance Studies, Review of Asset Pricing Studies,andFinancial
Management. Journal of Finance is one of the slowest top-tier business journals. Large
and significant time differences support the editorial differences hypothesis. (JEL G00)
Received December 14, 2016; editorial decision December 22, 2016 by Editor Paolo
Fulghieri.
How long does it take to get an article accepted at a finance journal? How
long does it take to get an article published online or in print? The tra-
ditional time metric that nearly all journals report is the mean/median
time of a single-round review. That is, the mean/median time that articles
take from submission to return. This is what the journal directly controls.
Since the large majority of articles are rejected, the mean/median single-
round turnaround time can be thought of (metaphorically anyway) as the
mean/median rejection time. This is useful information to know.
However, if we place ourselves in the shoes of assistant professors
facing a fixed tenure deadline, they won’t be successful if they submit a
tenure dossier with a long list of rejections—they need acceptances. They
want to know the mean/median acceptance time. That is, the mean/
I am the Secretary-Treasurer of the Society for Financial Studies and am compensated in this role. The
views expressed in this paper are strictly mine and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Society for
Financial Studies. I thank the American Finance Association, European Finance Association, Financial
Management Association, Society for Financial Studies, and University of Washington for supplying
publication history data about articles in their journals. I thank Franklin Allen, Hendrik Bessembinder,
Alex Edmans, Campbell Harvey, Andrew Karolyi, Laureen Maines, Jeffrey Pontiff, Jay Ritter, William
Schwert, Matthew Staton, and seminar participants at Indiana University for useful comments. I thank
Michael Flores, Michael Kulov, Dinesh Mettu, and Vipin Pasham for data collection and Jong H. Kim
and Mohan Vemulapalli for web-scraping programming. I am solely responsible for any errors. Send
correspondence to Craig W. Holden, Kelley School of Business, Indiana University, 1309 East Tenth
ß The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial
doi:10.1093/rcfs/cfx009 Advance Access publication February 11, 2017
median time that eventually published articles take to go from first-round
submission to final-round acceptance. Editors have pointed out to me
that they don’t control how long authors take to revise their paper, which
is certainly true. But journals do influence the mean/median author revi-
sion time by how many and what kind of revision demands are typically
made, by the editor’s typical revision instructions, and so on.
Not just assistant professors but all researchers face the journal ordering
problem. When you have a new working paper, where should you submit it
first? Second? And so on. Holding all else equal, a faster mean/median
acceptance time would suggest an earlier slot in the ordering. In addition,
all researchers want to know the mean/median online and print publication
times. That is, the mean/median time that eventually published articles take
from first-round submission to online publication and to print publication.
Researcher s are interested in these times because many additional people
read an article at the moment that it is published online and in print.
Therefore, the online and print publication times tell us how long it will
take for an article to start generating a larger impact (e.g., more citations).
Editors, academic societies, and journal publishers also want to know
mean/median acceptance and publication times, because journals com-
pete on speed as well as other performance dimensions. And each journal
wants to know how it compares to the competition.
Society as a whole wants to know mean/median acceptance and pub-
lication times because welfare gains come from the timely flow of new
research ideas. Time information may be relevant to public policy issues,
such as journal open access.
I collect the publication history of articles published in the “top
twenty” academic finance journals (defined below) and in “top-tier” ac-
ademic business journals (defined below) from 2012 to 2015. The data
comes from journal websites and from the American Finance Association
(AFA), European Finance Association (EFA), Financial Management
Association (FMA), Society for Financial Studies (SFS), and
University of Washington (UW). I post all of the public data on my
website (www.kelley.iu.edu/cholden) and plan to continue posting quar-
terly updates of the journal speed results for an expanding set of finance
and business journals for the indefinite future. I test the journal compe-
tition hypothesis, that mean and median acceptance and publication
times are the same across peer journals, versus the editorial differences
hypothesis, that they differ across peer journals.
I find that the median acceptance times of the top five general-interest
finance journals from fastest to slowest are Journal of Financial
Economics (JFE): 9.9 months; Journal of Financial and Quantitative
Analysis (JFQA): 10.6 months; Review of Finance (RF): 11.7 months;
Review of Financial Studies (RFS): 15.5 months; and Journal of Finance
(JF): 19.8 months. The mean acceptance times are similar and have the
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
103
same ordering as the medians. These patterns are consistent over calendar
time and consistent across the entire distribution. The median and mean
online and print publication times for JF are much slower than for the
other four. The majority of top-twenty finance journals that report ac-
ceptance times have a median acceptance time from 10.0 to 14.0 months.
The three fastest are Review of Corporate Finance Studies (RCFS), Review
of Asset Pricing Studies (RAPS), and Financial Management (FM). The
majority of top-tier business journals that report acceptance times have a
median acceptance time from 13.0 to 19.0 months. JFE, JFQA, and RF
are among the fastest top-tier business journals, and JF is one of the
slowest top-tier business journals. The large and significant differences
that I find across the top five general-interest finance journals, the top
twenty finance journals, and top-tier business journals support the edito-
rial differences hypothesis.
How much of this is new? Of course, individual researchers know their
own idiosyncratic experiences with various journals, and there is plenty of
rumor and speculation among colleagues. But many people have ex-
pressed to me their surprise at the results. “Who knew?” exclaimed one
journal editor. In addition to the hypotheses being tested, this paper
contributes by providing a fact-based view of the big picture of finance
journal speed—one that can only be obtained by aggregating this newly
available information.
A classic paper in the prior literature is Ellison (2002a), which examines
the mean acceptance time of the “top six” economics journals. He finds
that they have slowed down dramatically over the span of decades—from
an average of 9.3 months in 1970 to 21.9 months in 2000—and a similar
pattern holds across nearly all economics journals. Ellison (2002b) de-
velops a behavioral model that explains the slowdown as a relatively
arbitrary evolution in reviewer norms, in much that same spirit of how
one might explain the evolution of grade inflation.
Hirshleifer (2015) models the agency conflict between editors and ref-
erees. Referees are highly specialized and wish to maximize editor per-
ceptions of the referee’s ability. He shows that optimal strategy for
referees is to report both serious flaws and minor blemishes as serious
flaws. Editors, who are generalists, can’t tell the difference between flaws
and blemishes and so require authors to correct both. Thus, authors end
up doing “cosmetic surgery” on minor blemishes, in addition to removing
serious flaws. Presumably the resulting review process is slower than
would be the case in an alternative “truth-telling” equilibrium.
Spiegel (2012) examines trends in finance journals. Comparing 2010
with 1980, he finds three times more citations per article, three times
more words per introduction, three times more pages per article, and
an increase in co-authors from 1.6 to 2.4. Card and DellaVigna (2013)
find similar trends in the “top five” economics journals. All of these
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
104
changes are consistent with a longer and more complex review process,
but neither paper explicitly looks at mean/median acceptance and publi-
cation times.
In contrast to the prior literature, my primary focus is cross-sectional:
do mean and median acceptance and publication times differ across fi-
nance journals? The large and significant differences that I find across
multiple categories of peer journals support the editorial differences
hypothesis.
1. Hypotheses
Consider the top three finance journals (JF, JFE, and RFS). The same
three journals have been in close, intense competition for more than
twenty-five years. The relative position of the three journals, as measured,
for example, by citation impact factor, has stayed fairly close for a long
period of time, and the lead has changed multiple times. These three
journals draw from the same pool of potential articles, from the same
pool of potential referees, and from the same pool of potential editors. I
would argue that in the twenty-first century, the span of content areas
they cover is roughly the same across the three journals. In the twentieth
century, there were significant differences in content area. But in the
twenty-first century, those content area differences have largely washed
out—which is exactly what you would expect in a highly competitive
setting. Welch (2014) studies the decision-making of referees and finds
that on average across his sample, two of the top three journals used
nearly the same the number of referees per paper (1.2 referees per paper
for JF, 1.3 referees per paper for RFS, and no data for JFE).
In summary, if a set of peer journals has the same inputs and is highly
competitive, then one would expect the same performance outputs, in-
cluding on the time dimension. I call this the journal competition
hypothesis.
The Journal Competition Hypothesis. The mean and median accep-
tance time, online publication time, and print publication time
should be the same across peer journals.
Now consider expanding the scope to the top five general-interest fi-
nance journals (i.e., including JFQA and RF) or to the top twenty finance
journals (defined below). The same competition arguments apply to these
expanded sets of peer journals. So, one would expect the journal compe-
tition hypothesis to hold in each case, but this still leaves open the pos-
sibility of different competitive norms for each set of peer journals.
Finally, consider the set of top-tier journals across all business disci-
plines (defined below). Here it is much less clear that they are direct
competitors or that they draw f rom the same i npu ts. But ther e is
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
105
some flow of articles and referees across journals in different disciplines.
A priori, it seems less likely that the journal competition hypothesis
would hold across this set of peer journals.
Alternatively, there may be editorial differences across peer journals.
Returning to consider the top three journals, we observe different edito-
rial structures. JFE had a single editor handling 100% of the article flow
for nearly all of its history and just recently added a second editor. JF
also had a single editor handling 100% of the article flow for most of its
history, has a team of three currently, and has an incoming team of four.
One thing that is different about JF is that every paper also has an
associate editor. RFS has long delegated decisions to many editors.
Currently there are seven editors. The executive editor consults with
each editor, but the editors have the final decision on their own flow.
Another potential difference is different editorial philosophies. For
example, an editor may take a relatively more passive or more active
role in managing the review process. In a relatively more passive ap-
proach, the editor would receive report(s) from one or more referees
and possibly from an associate editor and then ask the author(s) to fulfill
all of the requests made. In a relatively more active approach, the editor
would receive the same set of report(s), but would eliminate some re-
quests deemed to be overkill or irrelevant and would apply the editor’s
own reading of the paper and judgment to resolve any contradictory
requests. Thus, the relatively more active editor might decrease accep-
tance time by asking the author(s) to fulfill a reduced list of requests and
by supplying a more clear-cut path to convergence. Alternatively, a more
active editor might increase acceptance time by adding many additional
requests of his or her own.
A third potential difference is different individual editor speeds. Some
editors give absolute priority to their editorial duties and put everything
else aside to get back to authors as soon as possible. Other editors may
not be so committed to speedy responses, may not be good at time man-
agement, or may be burdened by other service commitments (e.g., de-
partment chair).
In summary, if a set of peer journals has different editorial structures,
different editorial philosophies, and/or different individual editor speeds,
then one would expect different performance outputs, including on the
time dimension. I call this the editorial differences hypothesis.
The Editorial Differences Hypothesis. The mean and median accep-
tance time, online publication time, and print publication time
should differ across peer journals.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
106
2. Data
In recent years, most finance journals and many business journals have
taken to reporting the “publication history” of nearly every article that
they publish. The most commonly reported items are the first submission
date (usually called the “received” date), the final-round submission date
(usually called the “received-in-revised-form” date), the acceptance date,
and the published online date. Less frequently reported items are the
(non-typeset) manuscript published online date and the issue published
online date. All journals report the month and year that an issue was
published in print. I adopt the convention that the print publication date
is the first day of that month. I manually collect all publication history
items reported for all regular articles published in print during the sample
period for all selected journals from their websites with the exceptions
noted below. I filter out any observations that appear to have a negative
time difference between successive events. I convert the time metrics from
the number of days into standardized months by dividing by 365 and
multiplying by 12.
Among the top five general-interest finance journals, JFE has reported
publication history since its beginning in May 1974; JF began reporting
publication history in December 2012; and JFQA, RF, and RFS began
reporting just the article online date in April 2009, January 2007, and
April 2010, respectively. I obtain from the AFA the true acceptance date
(the date of final-round editor notice of acceptance or conditional accep-
tance) for all JF articles published in print from December 2012 to
December 2014 and use this data to compute JF’s acceptance time.
1
I
do not use the acceptance date reported on the Wiley/JF website, because
it is not the true acceptance date; rather, it is based on a date that is
shortly after the authors return the corrected, copy-edited manuscript. I
obtain from UW, EFA, FMA, and SFS the first-round submission date
and the acceptance date for all regular articles published in print during
2012–2015 in the JFQA, RF, FM, and the three SFS-owned journals
(RFS, RAPS, and RCFS), respectively. Independent of this paper, the
SFS-owned journals recently began reporting a more complete publica-
tion history as of January 2016.
I identify the “top eighteen” academic journals in finance based on
their average Thomson Reuters Institute for Scientific Information
(ISI) Citation Impact Factors for the years 2012 and 2013.
2
Thus, I
select all academic finance journals with an average impact factor of
1
I thank the AFA and especially Campbell Harvey for providing the JF true acceptance date data.
2
I only consider academic finance journals. Starting from the ISI “business finance” category, I exclude
accounting journals (e.g., The Accounting Review), economic journals (e.g., Journal of Monetary
Economics), multidisciplinary journals (e.g., Corporate Governance: An International Review), and prac-
titioner-oriented finance journals (e.g., Financial Analyst Journal).
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
107
0.833 or higher. To this list of eighteen journals, I add two relatively new
SFS journals (RAPS and RCFS), which are young enough not to have an
official ISI impact factor yet. However, their publisher, Oxford
University Press, has estimated their unofficial impact factors
3
using
the same methodology as ISI at 1.834 for RAPS and 1.000 for RCFS,
4
both of which are above the 0.833 cutoff for the original eighteen jour-
nals. Adding these two new journals to the original eighteen yields my
complete selection of the “top twenty” finance journals.
The top twenty finance journals are listed in Table 1. Panel A lists the
top five general-interest finance journals, and Panel B lists the rest of the
top twenty. For each journal, the table also contains the website of its
article archive, which contains the publication history information and its
average 2012 and 2013 impact factors.
I identify “top-tier” academic journals in business based on the internal
journal list of a top-twenty business school. The journal list specifies “A”
(i.e., top-tier) journals and “A–” (i.e., highly regarded) journals in all
business disciplines. The specific journals placed in each category are
determined by each disciplinary department within the context of general
schoolwide guidance. The journal list identifies 47 top-tier journals across
all business disciplines. Approximately half of them do not disclose pub-
lication history information. However, 23 of them do disclose publication
history information, including 5 finance journals and 18 non-finance jour-
nals. Table 1, Panel C, lists the discipline and journal names of 18 top-
tier, non-finance business journals that disclose publication history infor-
mation and the websites of their article archives.
I post all of the public data collected from journal websites (but not the
data supplied by the AFA, EFA, FMA, SFS, or UW) on my website
(www.kelley.iu.edu/cholden). I have created an automated web-scraping
program in python to collect publication history data. I plan to continue
posting quarterly updates of both the public data and journal speed re-
sults for an expanding set of finance and business journals for the indef-
inite future.
3. Results
3.1 The top five general-interest finance journals
Table 2 reports four journal time metrics for the top twenty finance
journals from 2012 to 2015. The columns show the median and mean
statistics for the final-round submission time, acceptance time, online
publication time, and print publication time. Panel A covers the top
3
There is nothing special about an official ISI impact factor, since it based entirely on public information!
4
The RAPS estimate is an average of both 2012 and 2013, whereas the RCFS estimate is based only on
2013 since its first issue was nine months later than that of RAPS.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
108
Table 1
Journal public data source and impact factor
Journal Website of each journal’s article archive Avg. 2012 & 2013 impact factor
Panel A: Top five general-interest finance journals
Journal of Finance http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-6261 5.183
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid¼JFQ 1.757
Journal of Financial Economics http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/0304405X 3.597
Review of Finance http://rof.oxfordjournals.org/content/by/year 1.538
Review of Financial Studies http://rfs.oxfordjournals.org/ 3.394
Panel B: Rest of the top-twenty finance journals
Financial Management http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1755-053X 1.102
International Review of Economics & Finance http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10590560 0.883
Journal of Banking and Finance http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03784266 1.325
Journal of Business Finance and Accounting http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1468-5957 1.136
Journal of Corporate Finance http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09291199 1.218
Journal of Empirical Finance http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09275398 0.936
Journal of Financial Econometrics http://jfec.oxfordjournals.org/content/by/year 1.070
Journal of Financial Intermediation http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10429573 1.917
Journal of Financial Markets http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/13864181 1.205
Journal of Financial Services Research http://link.springer.com/journal/volumesAndIssues/10693 1.116
Journal of International Money and Finance http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02615606 0.974
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1538-4616 1.029
Mathematical Finance http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-9965 1.174
Review of Asset Pricing Studies http://raps.oxfordjournals.org/ 1.834*
Review of Corporate Finance Studies http://rcfs.oxfordjournals.org/ 1.000*
(continued)
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
109
Table 1
Continued
Discipline Journal Website of each journal’s article archive
Panel C: Top-tier non-finance business journals that disclose relatively complete publication history information
Accounting Journal of Accounting & Econ http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01654101
Accounting Journal of Accounting Research http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1475-679X
Accounting The Accounting Review http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublication?journalCode¼accountingreview
Economics Econometrica http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0262/issues
Economics International Economic Review http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2354
Economics Journal of Bus & Econ Statistics http://amstat.tandfonline.com/loi/jbes#.U3It3vldWAg
Economics Journal of Economic Theory http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00220531
Economics Review of Economic Studies http://restud.oxfordjournals.org/content/by/year
Marketing Marketing Science http://pubsonline.informs.org/loi/mksc
Marketing Psychometrika http://link.springer.com/journal/volumesAndIssues/11336
Mgmt. Strategic Management Journal http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266
Operations Decision Sciences http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5915
Operations Information Systems Research http://pubsonline.informs.org/loi/isre
Operations Journal of Operations Mgmt http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02726963
Operations Management Science http://pubsonline.informs.org/loi/mnsc
Operations Manufactur & Service Oper Mgmt http://pubsonline.informs.org/loi/msom
Operations Operations Research http://pubsonline.informs.org/loi/opre
Operations Production and Operations Mgmt http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1937-5956/issues
*Impact factors for RAPS and RCFS are estimated by Oxford University Press using ISI’s methodology and public information.
The table provides the website of each journal’s article archive and each finance journal’s Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Citation Impact Factor on average for 2012 and
2013.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
110
Table 2
Journal time metrics for the top twenty finance journals
Final round submission time Acceptance time Online publication time Print publication time
Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Sample size for the four
journal time metrics
Panel A: Top five general-interest finance journals
Journal of Finance (JF) 19.8 20.9 34.5 36.3 35.1 36.9 0 145 216 216
Journal of Financial and Quant Analysis 10.6 12.0 29.6 30.6 29.0 30.1 0 217 217 216
Journal of Financial Economics 8.7 10.7 9.9 11.9 16.3 18.1 20.7 22.9 496 499 498 499
Review of Finance 11.7 12.1 15.2 15.8 25.9 26.1 0 154 154 154
Review of Financial Studies 15.5 18.8 18.7 22.2 21.7 25.5 0 357 347 357
Top five general-interest finance journals 8.7 10.7 12.5 14.7 21.1 23.5 25.3 27.0 496 1,372 1,432 1,442
Panel B: Rest of the top twenty finance journals
Financial Management 8.2 10.0 17.8 18.9 22.7 23.3 0 126 126 126
International Review of Econ & Finance 10.0 11.4 10.5 12.0 10.8 12.5 16.4 17.6 373 374 374 374
Journal of Banking and Finance 10.9 12.5 11.5 13.1 16.5 18.5 0 1,093 1,092 1,094
Journal of Business Finance and Acct 16.0 18.9 19.7 22.4 20.1 22.5 2 115 117 117
Journal of Corporate Finance (JCF) 10.1 11.1 10.3 11.4 10.9 11.8 13.7 15.5 360 364 364 364
Journal of Empirical Finance 11.8 13.4 13.5 15.1 13.8 15.5 16.7 18.5 246 255 255 255
Journal of Financial Econometrics 20.6 21.8 21.0 22.4 26.4 25.3 30.6 33.1 81 82 72 82
Journal of Financial Intermediation 19.1 20.5 25.2 27.0 0 0 101 101
Journal of Financial Markets 10.4 11.8 10.8 12.2 11.4 12.6 18.0 18.4 88 90 96 96
Journal of Financial Services Research 12.8 14.2 12.9 14.8 13.9 16.0 27.8 29.5 98 98 98 98
Journal of Money, Credit, & Banking (JMCB) 13.9 17.2 23.9 27.0 24.4 27.6 0 300 302 302
Mathematical Finance 11.0 13.3 10.0 11.5 18.3 21.0 38.5 39.2 69 50 120 120
Review of Asset Pricing Studies 7.6 8.7 9.5 11.3 13.0 14.4 0 32 29 32
Review of Corporate Finance Studies 7.4 11.4 11.1 13.4 15.2 16.3 0 23 23 23
Rest of the top twenty finance journals 10.9 12.7 11.3 13.4 13.3 15.9 18.1 20.9 1,317 3,002 3,169 3,184
Top twenty finance journals 10.4 12.4 11.7 13.8 15.4 18.2 20.4 22.8 1,813 4,374 4,601 4,626
(continued)
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
111
Table 2
Continued
Final round submission time Acceptance time Online publication time Print publication time
Journals being tested Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean
Panel C: Wilcoxon test for difference of medians and t-test for difference in means
Journal of Fin Econometrics vs. JMCB *** *** NS NS *** ***
Journal of Finance vs. JMCB *** *** *** *** *** ***
Journal of Bus Finance and Acct vs. JMCB ** NS NS NS NS NS
Review of Financial Studies vs. JMCB *** NS NS NS NS NS
Review of Corporate Finance Studies vs. JCF NS * NS NS NS NS
Review of Asset Pricing Studies vs. JCF ** ** NS NS NS NS
Financial Management vs. JCF *** * NS NS NS NS
Journal of Financial Economics vs. JCF ** NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
This table reports four journal time metrics for the top twenty finance journals from 2012 to 2015. The final-round submission (acceptance) time is the time from first-round
submission to final-round submission (acceptance). The online (print) publication time is the time from initial submission to online (print) publication. The Journal of International
Money and Finance is not shown because it only reported publication history for one article. *, **, *** means significant at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. NS means
not significantly different at the 10% level.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
112
five general-interest finance journals, and Panel B covers the rest of the
top twenty finance journals.
Panel A reports that the median acceptance time of the combined
sample of the top five general-interest finance journals is 12.5 months.
The median acceptance times by journal from fastest to slowest are JFE:
9.9 months; JFQA: 10.6 months; RF: 11.7 months; RFS: 15.5 months;
and JF: 19.8 months. The mean acceptance times by journal are similar
and have the same ordering, at 11.9 months, 12.0 months, 12.1 months,
18.2 months, and 20.9 months, respectively. The median and mean online
and print publication times for JF range from 34.5 months to 36.9
months, which are much slower than for the other four journals. JFQA
is the second slowest in median and mean online and print publication
times due to backend production problems that transpired primarily in
2014 and 2015.
5
The last four columns report the number of data points
for all four of the time metrics.
6
The large differences that I find across
the top five general-interest finance journals support the editorial differ-
ences hypothesis.
7
Figure 1 shows the median acceptance time by quarter of print publi-
cation for the top five general-interest finance journals. JFE, JFQA, and
RF are nearly always the three fastest. From 2012 through the second
quarter of 2014, the median acceptance times for these three journals are
very close to each other. From the third quarter of 2014 through 2015,
the three journals separate a bit, with JFE hovering around 9.0 months,
JFQA hovering around 11.4 months, and RF hovering around 13.1
months. RFS’s median acceptance time by quarter is nearly always
slower than the three fastest and nearly always faster than JF. It
hovers around 15.5 months. JF’s median acceptance time by quarter is
nearly always the slowest and hovers around 19.8 months. Overall, the
acceptance time differences between journals are consistent over calendar
time.
Figure 2 shows the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the ac-
ceptance time for the top five general-interest finance journals. The x-axis
provides cutoff times every three months. The y-axis reports the cumu-
lative percentage of each journal’s articles with an acceptance time less
than or equal to each cutoff time. The JFQA, JFE, and RF CDFs are
very close to each other and are shifted up (i.e., a larger percentage
5
Specifically, JFQA’s median online publication time slowed from 21.9 months in 2012 to 25.4 months in
2013, to 31.9 months in 2014, and finally to 37.5 months in 2015.
6
In most cases, this is the same as the number of articles published from 2012 to 2015. In other cases, the
journals change what items they report, not just in general, but even on an article-by-article basis. This
may be due to unique content items (e.g., a special issue, a presidential address) or for other reasons.
7
It is extremely difficult to assess the determinants of these editorial differences without very detailed,
inside journal data such as the number of rounds each paper took, the referee reports, the editor letters,
and so on.
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
113
accepted by a given time cutoff). For example, the cumulative percentage
of articles accepted within eighteen months by RF, JFE, and JFQA are
78.6%, 76.8%, and 75.8% respectively. The RFS and JF CDFs are
shifted down (i.e., a smaller percentage accepted by a given date).
Continuing the example, the cumulative percentage of articles accepted
within 18 months by RFS and JF are 52.1% and 33.1%, respectively. For
time cutoffs from 3 months to 36 months, JF has a lower cumulative
percentage than RFS. For time cutoffs of 39 months and longer, RFS has
a lower cumulative percentage than JF. All of the distributions are mod-
erately right-skewed, which is why I have placed more emphasis on the
medians than the means throughout the paper. Overall, the acceptance
time differences between journals are consistent across the entire
distribution.
Since JFE has reported its publication history from inception, I collect
all 42 years of data. Figure 3 shows median time data for JFE over 42
years.
8
For the first 24 years, JFE reported final-round submission dates.
About a year after Bill Schwert was announced as the new managing
editor in November of 1996, JFE switched to reporting acceptance
0
5
10
15
20
25
12
1Q
12
2Q
12
3Q
12
4Q
13
1Q
13
2Q
13
3Q
13
4Q
14
1Q
14
2Q
14
3Q
14
4Q
15
1Q
15
2Q
15
3Q
15
4Q
)shtnoM(emiTecnatpeccAnaideM
Quarter of Print Publicaon
JF
RFS
RF
JFQA
JFE
Figure 1
Median acceptance time by quarter in the top five general-interest finance journals.
8
For ease of comparison, the vertical scale in Figure 3 is the same as in Figure 1.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
114
dates. In 1974, JFE’s median final-round submission time was 2.5
months! This gradually increased over the years until it reached a peak
of 18.1 months in 2000. This decades-long slowdown over the twentieth
century is consistent with the pattern documented by Ellison (2002a) for
nearly all economics journals. In the twenty-first century, JFE has settled
into a very tight pattern hovering around 10 months. Not only is JFE fast
currently, but it has consistently been fast for more than a decade.
3.2 The top twenty finance journals
Returning to Table 2, Panel B reports that the median acceptance time of
the combined sample of the rest of the top twenty finance journals is 11.3
months. and the combined sample of all top-twenty finance journals is
11.7 months.
9
The majority of top-twenty finance journals that report
acceptance times have a median acceptance time in the range from 10.0 to
14.0 months. In other words, this range covers the majority “pack,” and
just a small number of journals are faster or slower than the pack. Based
on the median acceptance time, four journals are slower than the pack:
Journal of Financial Econometrics (JFEconometrics) at 21.0 months, JF
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
3 6 9 12151821242730333639424548130
selcitrAs'lanruoJhcaEfo%evitalumuC
Time (Months)
JF
RFS
RF
JFE
JFQA
Figure 2
The distribution of acceptance time for the top five general-interest finance journals by time cutoffs.
9
The Journal of International Money and Finance is not shown in Table 2, because it only reported the
publication history of one article.
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
115
at 19.8 months, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting (JBFA) at
16.0 months, and RFS at 15.5 months. Also based on median acceptance
time, four journals are faster than the pack: RCFS at 7.3 months, RAPS
at 7.8 months, FM at 8.2 months, and JFE at 9.9 months.
Panel C reports the statistical significance tests of the questions: (i) Are
the slowest journals significantly slower than the top-twenty finance
pack? (ii) Are the fastest journals significantly faster than the top-
twenty finance pack? The benchmark for the first question is the
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking (JMCB), which is the slowest
member of the top-twenty finance pack based on median acceptance
time. The benchmark for the second question is the Journal of
Corporate Finance (JCF), which is the fastest member of the top-twenty
finance pack based on median acceptance time. The specific tests reported
are a Wilcoxon test for the one-way difference in medians and a t-test for
the one-way difference in means.
Starting with the slowest journals, both JFEconometrics and JF have
both median and mean acceptance times that are significantly slower than
JMCB. Both the JBFA and RFS have median acceptance times that are
significantly slower than JMCB, but the means are not significantly dif-
ferent. In summary, all four journals are significantly slower than the top-
twenty finance pack in acceptance time.
0
5
10
15
20
25
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
)shtnoM( emiT naideM
Time
Median Acceptance Time
Median Final Round Submission Time
Figure 3
JFE median final-round submission time and median acceptance time over 42 years.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
116
JF has the slowest median and mean online publication time out of all
top-twenty finance journals, and both of these statistics are significantly
slower than the top-twenty finance pack. JF has the second slowest
median and mean print publication time out of all top-twenty finance
journals, and both of these statistics are significantly slower than the top-
twenty finance pack.
Turning to the fastest journals, RCFS has a mean acceptance time that
is significantly faster than JCF. The RCFS median acceptance time is not
significantly faster, but the lack of significance may be due in part to the
small number (23) of RCFS observations. Both RAPS and FM have
median and mean acceptance times that are significantly faster than the
pack. Finally, JFE’s median and mean acceptance times are not signifi-
cantly different than JCF, since JFE is very close to the edge of the pack.
Overall, RCFS, RCFS, and FM are significantly faster than the top-
twenty finance pack in acceptance time.
Are these patterns consistent over calendar time? Table 3 reports the
median acceptance time by year. The combined sample of top-twenty
finance journals is highly consistent, varying in a narrow range between
11.6 and 11.8 months. In Panels A and B, the large majority of individual
journals are fairly consistent over calendar time. Two exceptions are: (i)
JBFA speeding up from 15.0 months in 2012 to 6.6 months in 2015 and
(ii) the Journal of Financial Markets slowing down from 6.2 months in
2012 to 14.5 months in 2015. For the most part, the fast journals stay
fast, and the slow journals stay slow.
In conclusion, the large and significant time differences that I find
across the top twenty finance journals support the editorial differences
hypothesis.
10
3.3 The top-tier business journals
Table 4 reports four journal time metrics for top-tier business journals
that report publication history information from 2012 to 2015. Panel A
reports that the median acceptance time of the combined sample of top-
tier business journals is 16.0 months, which is 4.3 months slower than the
combined sample of top-twenty finance journals. The majority of top-tier
business journals reporting acceptance times have a median acceptance
time ranging from 13.0 to 19.0 months. So, the top-tier business pack
norm is several months slower than the top-twenty finance pack norm.
Four journals have median acceptance times that are slower than the
10
Alternatively, one might interpret that fact that 10 of the 18 finance journals that report acceptance time
data are in the top-twenty finance pack (i.e., have a median acceptance time between 10.0 and 14.0
months) as evidence supporting the idea that most journals are pushed by competition into relatively
similar mean and median acceptance and publication times. In other words, the alternative interpretation
could be viewed as supporting the journal competition hypothesis. Both views capture part of the overall
picture. The glass is both half-empty and half-full.
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
117
top-tier business pack: JF at 19.8 months, Journal of Accounting and
Economics (JAE) at 20.6 months, The Accounting Review (TAR) at
22.0 months, and Review of Economic Studies (RES) at 26.0 months.
Four journals have median acceptance times that are faster than the
Table 3
Median acceptance time by year for the top twenty finance journals and top-tier non-finance business
journals
Journal 2012 2013 2104 2015
Panel A: Top five general-interest finance journals
Journal of Finance 17.0 19.8 19.7
Journal of Financial and Quant Analysis 9.4 10.0 11.5 11.6
Journal of Financial Economics 9.5 10.4 9.9 9.4
Review of Finance 8.0 12.0 12.9
Review of Financial Studies 13.5 16.5 16.2 15.6
Top five general-interest finance journals 11.1 12.7 13.8 12.0
Panel B: Rest of the top-twenty finance journals
Financial Management 7.1 8.4 8.9 10.5
International Review of Econ and Finance 11.9 9.0 10.9 9.7
Journal of Banking and Finance 10.6 10.7 10.7 11.4
Journal of Business Finance and Accounting 15.0 19.0 12.0 6.6
Journal of Corporate Finance 11.9 10.6 10.9 9.3
Journal of Empirical Finance 15.1 14.0 11.8 13.8
Journal of Financial Econometrics 25.1 22.5 17.8 19.0
Journal of Financial Markets 6.2 11.2 10.6 14.5
Journal of Financial Services Research 10.5 13.3 14.5 13.0
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 15.7 14.9 11.2 13.2
Mathematical Finance 11.5 10.0
Review of Asset Pricing Studies 5.8 8.0 8.8 7.1
Review of Corporate Finance Studies 9.6 3.9 7.3 11.3
Rest of the top-twenty finance journals 11.9 11.5 11.0 11.3
Top twenty finance journals 11.7 11.8 11.7 11.6
Discipline Journal 2012 2013 2104 2015
Panel C: Top-tier non-finance business journals that disclose acceptance information
Accounting Journal of Accounting and Economics 21.5 20.6 20.4 20.9
Accounting Journal of Accounting Research 15.6 15.3 20.4 13.5
Accounting The Accounting Review 22.0 21.0 22.0 21.5
Economics Journal of Economic Theory 15.3 19.0 14.3 14.7
Economics Review of Economic Studies 26.0 31.0 24.0 26.0
Marketing Marketing Science 18.5 15.8 17.4 20.9
Mgmt. Strategic Management Journal 18.4 17.3 18.6
Operations Decision Sciences 10.8 12.1 13.5 11.9
Operations Journal of Operations Management 13.6 15.3 11.6 11.2
Operations Management Science 13.8 15.1 15.9 17.1
Operations Manufacturing & Service Oper Mgmt 12.7 14.6 19.7 17.8
Operations Operations Research 18.0 17.0 20.0 20.5
Operations Production and Operations Mgmt 17.0 20.0 18.0 15.0
Top-tier business journals 15.0 16.5 16.7 15.9
This table reports median acceptance times by year for the top twenty finance journals and top-tier non-
finance business journals from 2012 to 2015. Econometrica, International Economic Review, Journal of
Business and Economic Statistics, Journal of International Money and Finance,andPsychometrika are not
shown because they only reported the acceptance date for four or fewer articles.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
118
Table 4
Journal time metrics for top-tier business journals
Final round submission time Acceptance Time Online publication time Print publication time
Discipline Journal Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Sample size for the four journal
time metrics
Panel A: Top-tier business journals
Finance Journal of Finance 19.8 20.9 34.5 36.3 35.1 36.9 0 145 216 216
Finance Journal of Fin & Quant Analysis 10.6 12.0 29.6 30.6 29.0 30.1 0 217 217 216
Finance Journal of Fin Economics 8.7 10.7 9.9 11.9 16.3 18.1 20.7 22.9 496 499 498 499
Finance Review of Finance 11.7 12.1 15.2 15.8 25.9 26.1 0 154 154 154
Finance Review of Financial Studies 15.5 18.8 18.7 22.2 21.7 25.5 0 357 347 357
Accounting Journal of Account & Econ 20.3 22.9 20.6 23.2 21.3 23.7 24.7 27.5 110 111 111 111
Accounting Journal of Accounting Research 17.8 19.4 20.6 22.0 22.8 24.6 0 124 124 124
Accounting The Accounting Review 22.0 22.6 23.0 24.5 28.0 28.8 0 302 143 302
Economics Econometrica 23.5 25.2 30.9 33.5 30.0 32.6 196 1 197 197
Economics International Econ Review 14.0 16.0 28.8 31.2 28.5 31.4 198 1 202 202
Economics Journal of Bus & Econ Statistics 21.2 22.9 22.1 23.9 0 4 159 159
Economics Journal of Economic Theory 13.7 16.5 15.9 18.8 18.0 20.6 22.8 24.9 387 396 396 397
Economics Review of Economic Studies 26.0 29.3 29.1 33.3 34.6 38.3 0 197 197 198
Marketing Marketing Science (MKS) 18.7 19.8 22.1 23.5 24.9 25.6 0 200 200 200
Marketing Psychometrika 7.6 9.4 15.8 17.8 23.0 24.9 96 1 170 170
Mgmt. Strategic Mgmt Journal 19.2 20.9 18.2 20.1 23.3 24.9 32.4 34.3 326 239 327 327
Operations Decision Sciences 10.8 11.0 11.8 12.5 23.8 23.3 23.8 23.4 125 129 129 129
Operations Information Systems Research 32.0 32.8 39.0 38.0 0 0 167 167
Operations Journal of Op Mgmt (JOM) 12.7 12.5 13.2 12.7 13.4 13.1 15.4 15.7 107 112 113 113
Operations Management Science 15.7 17.5 22.0 23.7 27.0 28.5 0 644 644 644
Operations Manufact & Ser Oper Mgmt 16.8 19.5 21.8 23.6 23.6 26.2 0 163 163 163
Operations Operations Research 18.0 20.5 24.4 26.1 24.0 25.6 0 379 379 379
Operations Production and Op Mgmt 18.0 18.8 23.7 25.7 31.0 32.9 3 434 434 434
Top-tier business journals 13.6 16.2 16.0 18.2 22.5 24.6 26.8 28.4 2,044 4,809 5,687 5,858
(continued)
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
119
Table 4
Continued
Final round submission time Acceptance time Online publication time Print publication time
Journals being tested Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean
Panel B: Wilcoxon test for difference of medians and t-test for difference in means
Review of Econ Studies vs. MKS *** *** *** *** *** ***
The Accounting Review vs. MKS *** *** * NS *** ***
Journal of Accounting and Economics vs. MKS ** ** NS NS NS NS
Journal of Finance vs. MKS NS NS *** *** *** ***
Econometrica vs. MKS *** *** *** ***
Information Systems Research vs. MKS *** *** *** ***
Journal of Financial Economics vs. JOM *** *** *** NS NS NS NS NS
Journal of Financial & Quant Analysis vs. JOM ** NS NS NS NS NS
Review of Finance vs. JOM ** NS NS NS NS NS
Decision Sciences vs. JOM ** ** NS NS NS NS NS NS
Psychometrika vs. JOM *** *** NS NS NS NS
This table reports four journal time metrics for top-tier business journals from 2012 to 2015. The final-round submission (acceptance) time is the time from first-round submission
to final-round submission (acceptance). The online (print) publication time is the time from initial submission to online (print) publication. The acceptance times for
Econometrica, International Economic Review, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics,andPsychometrika are not shown because this information was only reported for
four or fewer articles. *, **, and *** mean significant at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. NS means not significantly different at the 10% level.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
120
top-tier business pack: JFE at 9.9 months, JFQA at 10.6 months, RF at
11.7 months, and Decision Sciences (DS) at 11.8 months.
Turning to the other time metrics, we can identify two additional jour-
nals that do not report acceptance times, but which appear to be in the
slow category: Econometrica (E) has the slowest median final round sub-
mission time, 23.5 months, and Information Systems Research (ISR) has
the slowest median print publication time, 39.0 months. Similarly, there is
one more journal that does not report acceptance times, but which ap-
pears to be in the fast category: Psychometrika (P) has the fastest median
final round submission time, 7.6 months.
Panel B reports statistical significance tests of the questions: (i) Are the
slowest journals significantly slower than the top-tier business pack? (ii)
Are the fastest journals significantly faster than the top-tier business
pack? The benchmark for the first question is Marketing Science
(MKS), which is the slowest member of the top-tier business pack
based on median acceptance time. The benchmark for the second ques-
tion is Journal of Operations Management (JOM), which is the fastest
member of the top-tier business pack based on median acceptance time.
Starting with the slowest journals, RES, TAR, and JAE have both
median and mean acceptance times that are significantly slower than
MKS. JF’s median and mean acceptance times are not significantly dif-
ferent than those of MKS. In summary, three of the slowest journals are
significantly slower than the top-tier business pack in acceptance time.
JF has the slowest median and mean online publication time out of all
top-tier business journals. RES, JF, E, and ISR have both median and
mean online publication times that are significantly slower than the top-
tier business pack. ISR has the slowest median and mean print publica-
tion times out of all top-tier business journals. JF has the second slowest
median and third slowest mean print publication times out of all top-tier
business journals. RES, TAR, JF, E, and ISR have both median and
mean print publication times that are significantly slower than the top-
tier business pack.
Turning to the fastest journals, JFE, DS, and P have both median and
mean final round submission times that are significantly faster than those
of the top-tier business pack. JFE, JFQA, and RF have median accep-
tance times that are significantly faster than those of the top-tier business
pack. JOM, which is the benchmark fastest member of the top-tier busi-
ness pack based on median acceptance time, is very efficient on the back-
end. Specifically, JOM has the fastest median and mean online and print
publication times out of all top-tier business journals. Thus, no journal is
significantly faster than JOM in online and print publication time.
Overall, JFE, JFQA, RF, DS, and P are significantly faster than the
top-tier business pack in either final-round submission time and/or
median acceptance time.
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
121
Returning to Table 3, Panel C reports median acceptance time by year.
The combined sample of top-tier business journals is highly consistent,
varying between 15.0 and 16.7 months. All of the individual journals are
fairly consistent over calendar time without any major exceptions. Again,
the fast journals stay fast, and the slow journals stay slow.
To summarize this section with a focus on finance journals, JFE,
JFQA, and RF are among the fastest top-tier business journals, and JF
is one of the slowest top-tier business journals. The large and significant
differences that I find across top-tier business journals support the edi-
torial differences hypothesis.
11
3.4 Backend Time Metrics
Table 5 reports backend time metrics (i.e., post-acceptance times) for the
top twenty finance journals and top-tier non-finance business journals.
Specifically, three metrics are reported: (i) the accepted to online time,
(ii) the accepted to print time, and (ii) the online to print time.
Starting with the median accepted to online time, 11 of the 32 journals
reporting this data take one month or less. So, it is possible to typeset and
post an article very quickly. If you add copyediting into the picture, it is
likely to take a bit longer, but the RFS is able to do both tasks in a
median accepted to online time of 2.6 months. JF and JFQA are the
slowest, taking 14.8 months and 17.7 months, respectively.
12
Turning to the median accepted to print time, 18 of 32 journals report-
ing this data take seven months or less. Conversely, 8 of 32 journals take
12 months or more to do this.
13
Mathematical Finance (MF) is at the
extreme high end, taking 29.5 months.
Finally, turning to the median online to print time, 20 of 37 journals
reporting this data take four months or less. JF is the third fastest jour-
nal, although this is due to back-loading online publication until shortly
before the print publication date. Two journals take 12 months or more
to do this. Again, MF is at the extreme high end, taking 19.3 months.
Print journal subscriptions have declined dramatically over the past
decade. For example, the number of print subscribers to the bundle of
SFS-owned journals (RFS, RAPS, and RCFS) has declined from 1,603 in
11
Again, the fact that 10 of the 18 top-tier business journals that report acceptance time data are in the top-
tier business journal pack (i.e., have a median acceptance time between 13.0 and 19.0 months) could be
viewed as supporting the journal competition hypothesis.
12
JF’s accepted to online time is slow is because it back-loads the copyediting and typesetting process until
shortly before the print publication date. JF could greatly speed this up by front-loading the copyediting
and typesetting process immediately after acceptance. JFQA’s accepted to online time was significantly
slowed down by the previously mentioned backend production problems in 2014 and 2015.
13
A fast accepted to print time can be obtained by shrinking the inventory of articles that have not yet been
published. This can be done by temporarily publishing more articles than are accepted. For example, in
2005 RFS had a three-year inventory of accepted articles waiting to be published. RFS temporarily
tripled the number of pages it published in order to reduce its inventory to about six months.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
122
Table 5
Backend time metrics for top-twenty finance journals and top-tier non-finance business journals
Accepted to online time Accepted to print time Online to print time
Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Sample size for time metrics
Panel A: Top five general-interest finance journals
Journal of Finance 14.8 15.7 15.3 16.3 0.6 0.6 146 146 268
Journal of Financial and Quant Analysis 17.7 18.6 16.6 18.2 1.8 1.9 217 215 79
Journal of Financial Economics 5.8 6.2 10.0 11.0 4.1 4.8 498 499 500
Review of Finance 2.7 3.6 13.5 13.9 10.6 10.5 154 154 199
Review of Financial Studies 2.6 3.3 6.0 6.7 3.1 3.5 347 357 349
Top five general-interest finance journals 5.6 8.2 11.1 11.9 3.5 4.3 1362 1371 1395
Panel B: Rest of the top twenty finance journals
Financial Management 8.6 8.9 13.3 13.3 3.9 4.5 126 126 123
International Review of Econ & Finance 0.3 0.5 5.2 5.6 5.1 5.3 374 374 445
Journal of Banking and Finance 0.4 0.6 4.1 6.0 3.6 5.8 1091 1093 1217
Journal of Business Fin & Account 3.5 3.8 4.0 4.0 1.4 1.5 122 119 78
Journal of Corporate Finance 0.3 0.4 3.3 4.1 3.1 3.7 364 364 385
Journal of Empirical Finance 0.3 0.4 3.0 3.4 2.7 3.1 256 255 254
Journal of Financial Econometrics 1.7 2.4 9.9 10.6 8.6 9.3 72 84 80
Journal of Financial Intermediation 5.6 6.3 0 0 110
Journal of Financial Markets 0.5 1.0 6.3 6.9 5.6 5.9 90 90 113
Journal of Financial Services Research 0.9 1.2 14.8 14.8 13.9 13.5 98 98 98
Journal of International Money & Finance 0.6 0.6 3.7 3.7 4.4 4.8 1 1 493
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 9.8 10.1 10.4 10.5 0.3 0.6 298 302 294
Mathematical Finance 6.1 6.0 29.5 29.1 19.3 19.5 50 50 112
Review of Asset Pricing Studies 2.1 2.1 5.2 5.7 4.0 3.8 29 32 29
Review of Corporate Finance Studies 1.7 2.0 4.6 5.0 2.4 3.0 23 23 23
Rest of the top-twenty finance journals 0.5 2.2 4.8 7.0 3.7 5.4 2,993 3,010 3,361
Top twenty finance journals 1.1 4.0 6.4 8.5 3.7 5.1 4,355 4,381 4,756
(continued)
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
123
Table 5
Continued
Accepted to online time Accepted to print time Online to print time
Disc Journal Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Sample size for time metrics
Panel C: Top-tier non-finance business journals that disclose relatively complete publication history information
Acct Journal of Account & Econ 0.4 0.5 3.7 4.3 2.8 3.5 111 111 133
Acct Journal of Account Res 2.3 2.6 4.8 5.2 2.5 2.7 124 124 124
Acct The Accounting Review 1.0 1.4 6.0 6.6 5.0 4.7 143 290 143
Econ Intl Econ Review 0.3 0.3 1 1 176
Econ Journal of Bus & Econ Stat 6.7 6.7 4 4 43
Econ Journal of Econ Theory 0.9 1.8 5.0 6.1 3.0 4.3 396 397 403
Econ Review of Econ Studies 3.4 4.1 9.0 9.1 4.9 5.0 197 198 202
Mkt Marketing Science 3.5 3.7 5.5 5.9 1.7 2.4 199 199 186
Mkt Psychometrika 6.6 7.2 1 1 169
Mgmt Strat Mgmt Journal 2.9 4.4 15.3 15.1 10.1 9.5 240 240 326
Op Decision Sciences 10.1 10.9 9.7 10.9 1.1 1.2 128 128 50
Op Info Systems Research 5.7 6.3 0 0 144
Op Journal of Op Mgmt 0.4 0.5 2.5 3.1 2.1 2.6 112 112 149
Op Management Science 5.8 6.1 10.3 11.0 4.5 5.0 644 644 629
Op Man & Ser Oper Mgmt 4.1 4.2 6.5 6.8 2.1 2.6 162 162 161
Op Operations Research 4.7 5.6 4.0 5.1 0.6 0.9 379 379 97
Op Prod and Op Mgmt 6.2 6.9 13.0 14.1 6.4 7.2 433 434 437
Top-tier business journals 4.4 5.7 8.8 9.7 3.9 4.7 4637 4796 4967
This table reports three journal backend time metrics (i.e., post-acceptance times) for the top twenty finance journals and top-tier non-finance business journals from 2012 to
2015. Econometrica is not shown because it only reported the acceptance date for one article.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
124
2006 to 684 in 2015. By contrast, the extent of RFS online readership can
be gauged by the 3,406 subscribers to its electronic Table of Contents
email alert as of April 2015. If the print subscriber trend continues unal-
tered into the future, then the number of RFS/RAPS/RCFS print sub-
scribers will hit zero in 2022. This trend is part of a broad shift from
analog/physical forms to digital/online forms across a wide variety of
media, including music, movies, books, newspapers, magazines, and so
on. Thus, a decade from now, it is likely that most academic journals will
have ceased print publication. At that point, only the accepted to online
time will matter.
Five of the top-twenty finance journals and two of the 18 top-tier, non-
finance journals take accepted to online time to an absolute minimum by
publishing online in continuous time.
14
This means that the moment that
an individual accepted article has been typeset (and copyedited, if appli-
cable), it is immediately published online in final form with full volume
and page number assignments. This completely eliminates any backend
waiting time beyond the completion of typesetting and/or copyediting. In
other words, individual articles do not sit in inventory waiting to be
assigned to an issue for final publication. For all practical purposes,
this makes the “issue” obsolete and irrelevant. Each accepted article is
published online in final form the moment it is ready to go in continuous
time.
In summary, there are major differences in backend speed.
4. Conclusion
I examine the acceptance time and the online/print publication times of
finance journals. I collect the publication history of articles published
during 2012–2015 in the top twenty academic finance journals and in
top-tier academic business journals from their websites and from the
AFA, EFA, FMA, SFS, and UW. I post all public data on my website
and plan to continue posting quarterly updates of the journal speed re-
sults for an expanding set of finance and business journals for the indef-
inite future. I test the journal competition hypothesis that mean and
median acceptance and publication times are the same across peer jour-
nals versus the editorial differences hypothesis that they differ across peer
journals. I find that the median acceptance times of the top five general-
interest finance journals from fastest to slowest are JFE (9.9 months),
JFQA (10.6 months), RF (11.7 months), RFS (15.5 months), and JF
14 The five finance journals are the International Review of Economics and Finance, Journal of Banking and
Finance, Journal of Corporate Finance, Journal of Empirical Finance,andJournal of International Money
and Finance. The two top-tier non-finance journals are Journal of Accounting and Economics and Journal
of Economic Theory. All seven are published by Elsevier. Elsevier calls this “in progress” publishing.
Do Acceptance and Publication Times Differ Across Finance Journals?
125
(19.8 months). The mean acceptance times are similar and have the same
ordering as the medians. These patterns are consistent over calendar time
and consistent across the entire distribution. The median and mean
online and print publication times for JF are much slower than the
other four. The majority of top-twenty finance journals that report ac-
ceptance times have a median acceptance time from 10.0 to 14.0 months.
The three fastest are RCFS, RAPS, and FM. The majority of top-tier
business journals that report acceptance times have a median acceptance
time from 13.0 to 19.0 months. JFE, JFQA, and RF are among the
fastest top-tier business journals, and JF is one of the slowest top-tier
business journals. The large and significant differences that I find across
the top five general-interest finance journals, the top twenty finance jour-
nals, and top-tier business journals support the editorial differences
hypothesis.
References
Card, D., and S. DellaVigna. 2013. Nine facts about top journals in economics. Journal of Economic
Literature 51:144–61.
Ellison, G. 2002a. The slowdown of the economics publishing process. Journal of Political Economy
110:947–93.
———. 2002b. Evolving standards for academic publishing: A q-r theory. Journal of Political Economy
110:994–1034.
Hirshleifer, D. 2015. Editorial: Cosmetic surgery in the academic review process. Review of Financial
Studies 28:637–49.
Spiegel, M. 2012. Reviewing less—progressing more. Review of Financial Studies 25:1331–38.
Welch, I. 2014. Referee recommendations. Review of Financial Studies 27:2773–2804.
Review of Corporate Finance Studies / v 6 n 1 2017
126
