Journal of Management Scientific Reports

The core mission of Journal of Management Scientific Reports (JOMSR) is to publish rigorous empirical research designed to provide evidence that confirms, refines, or refutes existing theories.

JOMSR will consider three types of initial submissions:

1. Original Research, Full submission in which a completed original study is presented in full. This type of submission will typically include hypotheses, method, results, and discussion sections in the initial submission.
2. Original Research, Results-Masked submission in which a completed original study is presented, but the initial submission does not include the study’s results or discussion. The submission should include introduction, hypotheses, and methodological details to allow evaluation of the research.
3. Invited Editorial submissions will primarily be methodological articles in which the authors provide recommendations on how to conduct studies that support JOMSR’s mission. Articles about theory may also be considered. These articles can only be submitted by invitation from the Editor-in-Chief. Although invited, editorials will still be subject to the blind review process.  If you have an idea for a methodological or theory contribution to JOMSR, please contact the Editor directly (maria.kraimer@rutgers.edu).

Below we provide suggested guidelines to help authors of the first two types of manuscripts (original research submissions) better align their papers with JOMSR’s mission.

For details on formatting the paper, please download the JOMSR Style Guide.

For details on JOMSR's open science policy and methods checklist, please download the Methods Checklist.

Guidelines for Original Research Manuscripts (full submission and results-masked)

Initial submissions will be reviewed by the Editor using standard screening criteria (e.g., comprehensiveness, fit, and clarity).  Those that pass this review will be subject to a double-blind peer review process (typically 2 reviewers) and evaluated on the following criteria:

• Contribution to theory refinement. Original research manuscripts should test hypotheses that are clearly grounded in existing theory. This may include empirical tests of previously untested, but published, theoretical propositions, constructive replications of published tests of a theory, tests of theoretical assumptions, or tests of competing theories. Manuscripts should clearly explain how the study either confirms, generalizes, limits, or refutes existing theory
• Methodological rigor. Hypotheses tested with a rigorously designed study that balances internal and external validity will be more positively evaluated. The study design should be appropriate for testing the theory and hypotheses. Multiple studies within a single paper are not expected.
• Implications for researchers. The study’s findings should have clear implications for future research testing the specific unit theory (i.e., specific model or hypotheses) and for advancing the programmatic theory (i.e., general knowledge) to which the unit theory contributes.

In general, papers should include the following main sections: Introduction, Theoretical Background and Hypotheses, Methods, Results, and Discussion (although see below for the “results-masked” review option for the first submission).

1. Introduction of the study should include a clear discussion of the phenomena being studied and the theory being tested to understand that phenomena.

• Be sure to address the study domain (e.g., leadership, corporate social responsibility), levels of analysis (e.g., individual, team, company, industry), and constructs of interest. Consider how the unit theory (i.e., specific model) being tested informs the programmatic theory (i.e., general knowledge) on the study domain (see Cronin, Stouten, & Van Knippenberg, 2021).
• Explain why your test of the theory is needed.
• If there have been no empirical tests yet of the existing theory (to your knowledge), clearly indicate that your paper is the first test of the theoretical propositions.

1. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses section should:
   • Provide a brief overview of the unit theory and explain how your specific hypotheses fit within the unit theory.
   • Provide a brief literature review that includes a summary of the findings from previous tests of the theory and a description of how previous studies have tested the theory (their methodology).
   • Be sure to clearly explain how the theory leads to your specific hypotheses and include formal hypothesis statements.

1. Method section should include a paragraph to clearly explain how you approached the methodology chosen for testing the hypotheses and why it is appropriate. Essentially, answer the question “How does the method fit the theory?” For example, if you conducted an experimental field study, explain why that is an appropriate method for testing the theory.
   • Be sure to also describe the study’s recruitment and sampling procedures, construct measures or survey questions, and sample from which the data is drawn.
   • For the analytical methods (e.g., statistical techniques), the appropriateness and/or improvement over previous research should be clearly justified.

1. Results section should provide complete and transparent evidence of the empirical results. It should conform to the JOMSR Methods Checklist. Results of hypothesis testing should be reported in tables and figures following the JOMSR Style Guide.
   • Supplemental analyses to provide tests of robustness or to further explore an unexpected finding (that is not hypothesized) are encouraged and should clearly be labeled as Supplemental Analyses.

1. Discussion section should include theoretical implications, in which you elaborate on how the results inform the unit and programmatic theory; and include implications for researchers continuing to study the phenomena more broadly, including future research suggestions.
   • Practical or policy implications are not required but can be included if the study’s findings are relevant to organizational practices or public policy.

Guidelines for Original Research, “Results-Masked” Manuscripts

For the initial submission, JOMSR provides authors with a results-masked review submission option.¹ These manuscripts report original research that has already been completed but provide authors with the option to have the first submission evaluated without the results presented. Authors selecting this option should prepare their initial submission excluding the Results and Discussion sections. That is, these submissions should include the Introduction, Theoretical Background and Hypotheses, and Methods (including statistical approaches) as described above.

The abbreviated paper will undergo the double-blind peer review and be evaluated on the merits, rigor, and quality of the study’s contribution to theory refinement based on the introduction, hypothesis development, and methods. Our goal with this option is to encourage authors to propose methodologically rigorous tests of a theory without concern for whether the results are statistically significant. To advance our understanding of existing theory, we firmly believe we should welcome the results from sound research regardless of whether they support the proposed hypotheses, yield ‘null’ results, or replicate (or fail to replicate) previous work.

Following the initial round of reviews, manuscripts may be rejected outright, offered the opportunity to revise and resubmit (in which case the revised manuscript will continue to be masked results), or accepted “in principle” for publication. Following “in-principle acceptance,” the authors will submit a revised manuscript that includes Results and Discussion sections. At this point, authors should not deviate from the stated research procedures. A final acceptance will depend on accurate and complete analyses as described in their last submission as well as a justifiable interpretation and discussion of the findings. The nature or direction of the results will not be considered. Authors may be asked to revise and resubmit one more time before reaching the final acceptance.

Page length

Full manuscripts should be limited to a total of 50 pages inclusive of the text, endnotes, references, appendices, tables, and figures. On-line appendices can be used as needed.

Results-masked manuscripts should be limited to a total of 35 pages inclusive of the text, endnotes, references, appendices, tables, and figures (tables/figures with results should not be included in results-masked submissions). On-line appendices can be used as needed.

¹We thank the Editor of Journal of Business & Psychology, Dr. Steven Rogelberg, for adopting this initiative and sharing his advice and guidelines with JOMSR.

REFERENCES

Cronin, M. A., Stouten, J., & van Knippenberg, D. 2021. The theory crisis in management research: Solving the right problem. Academy of Management Review, 46: 667–683.