Introduction

#EditorObservations 12 Understanding the review process (YouTube, 1m 31s)

Understanding how the review process works is fundamental to being able to successfully navigate it. Although the basic process is pretty similar for all journals, there are some distinguishing features. Many journals have expert editors-in-chief and reviewers only. In these instances, the editors-in-chief handle the submissions, send them out to reviewers, read the reviewer’s comments and then moderate the revision process. An increasing number of journals are adopting the model of having associate editors who handle the submissions once assigned to them by the editor-in-chief. In this case, the primary role of the editor-in-chief is to make a good judgment at the very beginning of the submission process: to desk-reject articles that are highly unlikely to make it though to publication (in the interest of the authors, associate editors and reviewers). Just before publication, these editors-in-chief have to check the article once more to ensure compliance with all publishing requirements. In this model, the associate editors can also desk-reject a paper. If they choose not to, they send it out for review and moderate the revision process until they make a final decision.

Why is it important to understand the review process? Because it helps authors to understand who to contact; because it guides authors in terms of what and how they communicate with reviewers; and because it fosters empathy. Publishing environments characterised by empathy are kinder for all involved.

I hope that the #editorobservations in the following subsections help authors to develop a better understanding of the hard work of everyone involved in the publishing of a journal.