The Strategic Management Journal seeks to publish the highest quality research with questions, evidence and conclusions that are relevant to strategic management and engaging to strategic management scholars. We receive manuscripts with a diverse mix of topics, framings, and methods, and our acceptances reflect this diversity. More specifically, the Strategic Management Journal seeks to publish papers that develop and/or test theory, replicate prior studies, explore interesting phenomena, and evaluate the many methodologies used in our field. SMJ also publishes studies that demonstrate a lack of statistical support in a particular sample for specific hypotheses or research propositions. We welcome a diverse range of researcher methods and are open to papers that rely on statistical inference, qualitative studies, conceptual models, computational models and various kinds of mathematical models.
Guidelines Regarding Empirical Research in SMJ
Reporting Results of Statistical Analyses
SMJ no longer accepts papers for publication that report or refer to cutoff levels of statistical significance (p-values). In statistical studies, authors should report either standard errors or exact p-values (without asterisks) or both, and should interpret these values appropriately in the text. Rather than referring to specific cutoff points, the discussion could report confidence intervals, explain the standard errors and/or the probability of observing the results in the particular sample, and assess the implications for the research questions or hypotheses tested.
SMJ also now requires in papers accepted for publication that authors explicitly discuss and interpret effect sizes of relevant estimated coefficients.
As of January 1, 2016, new submissions that do not conform to these policies will be returned to the authors for revision prior to review. The SMJ editorial on “Creating Repeatable Cumulative Knowledge in Strategic Management” (2016, available online at the SMJ Wiley Online website prior to publication) provides more detailed explanation of these policies.
Replication Studies and Studies that Report “Non-results”
SMJ publishes and welcomes submissions of replication studies. Additional guidelines will be provided in the SMJspecial issue on replication. SMJ publishes and welcomes submissions of studies with non-results. These types of studies demonstrate a lack of statistical support in a particular sample for specific hypotheses or research propositions. Such hypotheses or propositions should be straightforward and logical. Studies should be conducted rigorously and assess the robustness of the non-results, such as robustness to alternative measurement, statistical specifications and estimation methodologies.
Causal Inference
SMJ strongly supports research that seeks to address interesting and important questions in strategic management that involve complicated causal processes. SMJ recognizes that statistical analyses relevant to these questions may raise the issue of endogeneity. If relevant, authors should acknowledge this issue in submitted manuscripts, and make a good faith effort to address it. In some cases, causal inference may be impossible, but statistical correlations, especially if used to rule out some alternative
hypotheses or mechanisms, may still be of interest. The SMJ editorial on “Quantitative Empirical Analysis in Strategic Management” (2014, volume 35: 949-953) provides more detailed explanation.
Data Snooping and P-hacking
SMJ strongly disapproves of data snooping and p-hacking practices in empirical research. Authors of submitted papers should not search databases for statistically significant coefficients with the intention of subsequently formulating hypotheses that fit the significant coefficients. Authors also should not adapt experimental designs with the primary intention of producing statistically significant results. In addition, authors of submitted papers should address the material significance (magnitude) of the results, in addition to statistical significance.