HABLA lab

Thought you'd enjoy this little take on Peer Review.

What REALLY happens though when you submit a manuscript to a journal? Once you think your manuscript is ready for review you submit it to the appropriate journal following their instructions. Many of the manuscripts in our field are uploaded through Scholar One or another, similar program. This makes it easier to see what is happening with your manuscript and makes it faster to get out to review (compared to mailing in 3-4 copies of your manuscript and then having editors mailing it out and so on). Sometimes the manuscript is blinded-- that is all identifying information about the authors is taken off the manuscript so that reviewers don't know whose work they are reviewing. But, let's face it a reviewer who is qualified to review the work usually can narrow down likely candidates-- so I don't think this step is necessary. On the other hand, I very often review manuscripts from outside communicative disorders and I don't usually can't even guess who the authors might be.

The editor will receive an e-mail that the manuscript has been uploaded and it's up to them to assign it to the appropriate associate editor-- usually, someone who knows something about the topic of the manuscript. They then find reviewers to review the work and write a critique about it. Most journals have guidelines about how to write a review. Here's an example from the JSLHR website. Usually, the reviewer looks at whether the rationale or motivation for the paper is adequate and if the literature is well-developed, accurate, and leads to the research question. Is the research design appropriate for answering the question? Are the statistics done and interpreted correctly? Is the work important? Does it have clinical or theoretical implications? Also, reviewers are asked to comment on the clarity and organization of the work, but not to find each and every typo or badly-worded sentence or to act as a copy-editor. The content of the paper is what reviewers are asked to review.

The two to three reviews usually then go back to the AE who makes a recommendation to the editor and then the editor makes a decision. The reviews and decision letter goes back to the author(s). Usually the decisions are to accept, revise, or reject. Most manuscripts are not accepted as is. Usually some level of revision is necessary.

Once a paper is revised it will go back to the editor who may accept it or send it out for another round of review. The authors write a cover letter indicating what they did to respond to the review. Usually, the same reviewers will see it again.

I find that most of the time the process strengthens the paper. Comments (whether the reviewers "got it" or not) help me to see where I wasn't clear or where my argument needs to be strengthened. Sometimes it can be frustrating, but most of the time I'm happier with final product.