the paper was perfectly clear and was written at a level so that it could reach a broad audience [...]the referees responded that the results were self-evident [...] my coauthor suggested that the problem with the paper might be that we had made the argument too easy to followDe gör ett nytt försök:
While making the same point as the original paper, the new paper [...] had fifteen equations, two propositions and proofs, dozens of additional mathematical expressions, and a mathematical appendix containing nineteen equations and even more mathematical expressions. I personally could no longer understand the paper and I could not possibly present the paper alone.Och hur gick det då?
The paper was published in the first journal to which we submitted. It took two years to receive one referee report. The journal sent it out to a total of seven referees, but only one was able to write a report on it.Hakes avslöjar inte vilket papper det rör sig om, men man kan utläsa att det följande:
Hakes David, and Shin Dongsoo. 2008. “Warranties as a device to extract rent from low-risk users of a product.” Managerial and Decision Economics 29(1): 1.