Inside the Journal

By Robert H. Colson

E-mail Story
Print Story
As they do every year, The CPA Journal editors would like to thank the editorial board members, review board members, ad hoc reviewers, and the many diligent professionals that create the articles the rest of us read.

The Journal serves the CPA profession by providing a public forum for analysis, discourse, and debate on the most important technical and professional issues in accounting and auditing, taxation, finance, management, technology, and CPA professional responsibilities. It publishes three types of articles: focused analyses of interest to all CPAs; essential professional information in about two-dozen interest areas; and, in Perspectives, edited by Thomas W. Morris, opinion pieces and assessments of current affairs affecting CPAs.

The Journal operates as a reviewed submission journal, with papers submitted from the diverse grassroots of the profession: public practice, academe, industry, government, regulatory agencies, standards setters, and retirement. After an editorial assessment for general appropriateness, manuscripts are sent to two members of the editorial board or editorial review board, or ad hoc reviewers, for a blind review (the reviewers do not know the author’s identity, and vice versa) for timeliness, relevance, innovation, readability, and technical accuracy.

Reviewers can accept, reject, or request revisions from the authors based on those criteria. Agreeing with the author’s point of view or conclusions is not a consideration. The Journal editors oversee the review process, make final determinations based on the reviews received, and schedule articles for publication in a way that covers current issues in the profession. The editors also offer significant writing assistance to achieve the crisp, concise, and straightforward style characteristic of the Journal. Authors receive page proofs of their articles for review before publication.

During the year between June 1, 2003, and May 31, 2004, the Journal received 333 submissions (340 and 199 in the two previous periods). Of those, 228 (182 last year) were eventually accepted, 85 (83 last year) were rejected, 49 (75 last year) were returned to the authors for revisions, and five were withdrawn before a decision was reached. The average length of time in the review process was 50 days (61 and 76 in the two previous periods). The average article took approximately 166 days from acceptance to publication (149 and 132 in the two previous periods). Individuals with some academic affiliation submitted 177 articles (163 last year); 156 submissions (177 last year) came from nonacademics. The acceptance rate for submissions from academics was 70% (46% last year); for nonacademics, the acceptance rate was 60% (65% last year). Currently, we have an inventory of 96 articles accepted for publication in the Essentials and Perspectives sections.

The Journal editorial staff plans the content for a particular issue in the last week of the third month preceding the issue date. For example, the content for the January 2005 issue was determined in the last week in October from the inventory of available accepted articles. The production process for an issue requires approximately 45 days, with another 30 days of editorial lead-time. The Journal may “fast-track” an important article if timeliness is an issue, but the capacity for fast-tracking is limited to one or two items per issue.

Members of the Journal’s editorial board develop topics and solicit authors, review submissions, and participate in the annual Max Block Distinguished Article Award program. The editorial board, editors, and production staff are recognized each month in the masthead. In addition to these hard-working and dedicated individuals, the Journal has benefited in the past period from the efforts of the following members of the review board and ad hoc reviewers:

Marie Arrigo, Myron Blatt, Louis Braiotta, Jack M. Brill, Martin S. Cantor, Lynn Chambers, Charles Chen, Rona Cherno, Andrew Cohen, Ann Burstein Cohen, Melvin Crystal, Barry F. Doll, William H. Dresnack, Peter Drexler, Roseanne T. Farley, Frank Federmann, Peter H. Frank, Neil Gibgot, Henry Goldwasser, H. Stephen Grace, Dan M. Guy, Abraham Haspel, Mark Hettler, Ira Inamer, Mark O. Israel, Raymond P. Jones, Joseph Koletar, Oscar Kolodzinski, Mary-Jo Kranacher, Joel Lanz, Kevin Lewis, Ernest Markezin, John McAllister, Mark Mycio, Ray Nowicki, Hugo Nuremburg, John E. Oehler, John J. O'Leary, Dwight Owsen, Marilyn A. Pendergast, Allan Rabinowitz, Mark Rachleff, Thomas R. Robinson, Frederick Rothman, Barry Seidel, Mitchell J. Smilowitz, Charles A. Spector, Joel Steinberg, William Stocker, Alan R. Sumutka, Neil Tipograph, George I. Victor, Wanda Wallace, Warren Weinstock, Ron West, James Woehlke, Cristina N. Wolff, and Philip Wolitzer.

Finally, I would like to thank all those members of NYSSCPA committees that have devoted their time and effort to write for the Journal. Most of the nonacademic submissions come from this group of dedicated professionals. They participate in the highest manner in developing our profession by unselfishly sharing their knowledge. Their efforts are particularly appreciated. Thanks!

Robert H. Colson, PhD, CPA
Editor-in-Chief
rhcolson@nysscpa.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



The CPA Journal is broadly recognized as an outstanding, technical-refereed publication aimed at public practitioners, management, educators, and other accounting professionals. It is edited by CPAs for CPAs. Our goal is to provide CPAs and other accounting professionals with the information and news to enable them to be successful accountants, managers, and executives in today's practice environments.

©2008 The New York State Society of CPAs. Legal Notices