In the peer review process, the quality and potential contribution of each manuscript is evaluated by one's peers in the scientific community. This is a key convention in the publication of research.
Authors can expect their manuscripts to be reviewed fairly, in a skilled, conscientious manner. The comments received should be constructive, respectful, and specific.
Journal editors may request that reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on specific criteria, which may vary across journals or for non-empirical article types, such as commentaries or reviews.
The action editor scans the paper to gain an independent view of the work. This "quick read" provides a foundation for the more thorough reading that follows — it by no means determines the final decision, but does parallel how authors can expect many reviewers (and readers) to approach their papers.
First, the editor scans the paper from beginning to end for obvious flaws in the research substance and writing style. If problems show on the surface, a deeper reading is likely to uncover other matters needing attention.
After this initial examination of your manuscript, the action editors, as well as any peer reviewers, will follow these general guidelines:
Read the abstract
Major problems in the abstract often reflect internal flaws.
The major goal in reading the abstract is to understand the research question:
- Is it clearly defined, relevant, and supported by the methodology?
- What is the sense of the research question, methodology, findings, and interpretations?
APA publication policy emphasizes conclusion-oriented abstracts: What did the research find, and what do the findings mean?
Examine the full manuscript
If it is more than 35 typed, double-spaced pages (including references, tables, and figures), this could pose a problem for the APSS journal.
- How long are the Introduction and the Discussion sections relative to other sections of the paper?
- Does the paper adhere to journal-specific guidelines?
These guidelines can be found on the Manuscript Submission tab of the journal's webpage.
Scan the paper's headings
- Are they well organized?
- Does a clear structure emerge?
If not, the author has not achieved coherence.
Scan the references
- Are they in APA Style? Consider the fact that the APSS journal follows the APA style of referencing.
Scan the tables and figures
- Do they clearly portray the information?
- Can they stand alone without captions?
- Are they well constructed and in APA Style?
A "no" to any of these questions suggests problems in the author's presentation of findings.
- If the text contains a large number of statistics, could they be more appropriately put into tables or figures?
The editor drafting the decision letter should be synthesizing the input from multiple reviewers into a cohesive list of improvements that should be made to the manuscript. Any comments from the reviewers will be appended to the official decision letter.
These categories constitute the editorial actions that may be taken on a manuscript.
Rejection
The flaws that lead to this decision generally center on substantive or methodological issues. A manuscript is usually rejected because it is outside the area of coverage of the journal; it contains serious flaws of design, methodology, analysis, or interpretation; or it is judged to make only a limited novel contribution to the field.
Revise and resubmit
In most cases, manuscripts may have publication potential but are not yet ready for final publication. The study as presented may not merit acceptance as is but may warrant consideration after substantive revision (e.g., reorganizing the conceptual structure, conducting additional experiments, or modifying analyses).
The action editor will give the author an invitation to revise and resubmit for another round of reviews (usually with the same reviewers). An action editor cannot guarantee acceptance of a revised manuscript, but authors who respond flexibly and attend closely to suggested revisions enhance their chances for acceptance.
Authors must include a detailed cover letter outlining their responses to the revisions. Authors may receive this decision multiple times before acceptance.
Acceptance
In very few cases, a manuscript may be accepted for publication on first reading, with only minor revisions required. More typically, acceptances follow the successful revision of a manuscript previously rejected with an invitation to revise and resubmit.
Once a manuscript is accepted and appropriate paperwork has been obtained, it enters the production phase of publication. At this point, no further changes can be made by the author other than those suggested by the copyeditor.
If your manuscript is rejected, and if you believe a pertinent point was overlooked or misunderstood by the reviewers, you may appeal the editorial decision by contacting the editor responsible for the journal.
The editor might then decide to send the appeal to the (associate) editor who handled the initial submission.
If you appeal to the editor and are not satisfied with the editor's response, the next step is to contact us.
