To our delight, almost none of the reviewers and editors recognized the manuscripts as ones recently published by their journals. They went on to review them and in most cases, recommended their rejection. They pointed to flaws in the designs, analyses, theorizing, etc. that they felt invalidated the study. They left no door open for revision! However, we ran into a problem: one editor, whose reviewers had detected the ruse, alerted the association of journal editors. He warned them that someone was sending previously-published articles back to the same journals that had published them, with a few cosmetic changes, to see if they would be re-accepted. Actually, this individual claimed we were actually trying to publish these articles under "our" name, which was, of course, crazy. As already noted, we had promised the authors of these manuscripts that we had no intention of actually publishing them and the names we used were fakes that did not exist in psychology and with a little attention would have been revealed as joke name (e.g., Beulah L. Ardass; Frank Lee Manure). So, the second aspect of the experiment-would previously-rejected manuscripts be accepted when a high-status author's name was substituted for the original low-status author-was derailed.