Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Marketing Management

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Management Inquiry
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Driver, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Reviews

Reviewer Feedback as Discourse of the Other

A Psychoanalytic Perspective on the Manuscript Review Process

Michaela Driver

East Tennessee State University

This article contributes to dialog in the field about the nature of the manuscript review process. It develops a psychoanalytic framework for understanding how participants in the review process construct each other as subjects in discourse and why the experience of alienation inevitably marks this process. The framework suggests that participants can draw on different subject positions with regard to this alienation. One is imaginary and entails the failed fantasy that lack and alienation can be overcome. The other is symbolic and entails a mutual engagement with this failure. The article suggests imaginary positions are less constructive, resulting in struggles between participants as others. By contrast, it suggests symbolic positions are more constructive, resulting in struggles with otherness and opportunities for more creative outcomes. The article explores reviewer reflexivity as an important element of symbolic interactions in which participants have responsibility for the production of relationships in the review process.

Key Words: review process • discourse • psychoanalysis • Lacan • subjectivity

Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol. 16, No. 4, 351-360 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1056492607310982


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?