Publication Process

1
Publication Process

• Submitting and peer review

2
Overview

• Submit
• Where to submit
• How to submit
• Editor
• Sends to Reviewers
• Reads it themselves
• Sends you decision letter
• Decision
• 1. Accept
• 2. Revise and Resubmit (as new or original)
• 3. Reject
• Next step
• If RR, then make changes, cover letter
• If reject, make changes?, submit down

3
Where to submit?

• Journals have a fairly stable hierarchy of
  reputation
• Broader audience base higher reputation
• (http//www.psychwiki.com/wiki/Journals_in_P
  sychology)
• Within each discipline ask about hierarchy
• (http//www.psychwiki.com/wiki/Journals_in_
  Social_and_Personality_Psychology)
• Focus of journal?
• See each journals website for focus/scope of the
  journal
• Where you submit helps you decide which audience
  member to write for

How to submit?

• Each journal lists unique instructions
• http//www.editorialmanager.com/lahu/

4
other pre-submission steps

• Ask journals
• What is review process?
• How many reviewers?
• What is turn-around time?
• Special formatting such as APA, MLA, etc?
• Common mistakes to avoid?
• ASK THESE QUESTIONS, especially if first time
  submitting to that journal

5
After the submission is sent

• Action editor is assigned ( 1
  week)
• Action editor skims for initial
  threshold decision
• Action editor finds reviewers ( 1
  month)
• Reviewers have X number of (3-6 months)
  months to complete review
• Action editor has X number of
  ongoing manuscripts
• Action editor reads reviews
• Action editor reads article
• Action editor makes decision ( 1 month)

6
Possible outcomes

• Accept
• Minor revisions required problems are mostly
  about presentation or small problems with
  literature review, analysis, discussion
• Revise and Resubmit (original and new)
• Major revisions required problems can be almost
  anything (but importance of study is
  acceptable)
• new submission means the editor believes
  fundamental issues exist and he/she is not sure
  you can overcome them so you must resubmit as a
  new submission as compared to true RR.
• Reject
• Problems prevent publication such as flawed
  theorizing or methodology, or viewed as
  unimportant
• Notice that flawed analysis does not prevent
  publication because you can re-do analysis, and
  flawed Discussion does not prevent publication
  because can be re-written.

7
If RR

• What are reviewers/editors looking for?
• Get sample response letters from colleagues
• gmail database
• Create response letter
• Respond to each point
• Start with editors
• Then major reviewer points
• Then minor reviewer points
• Explain whether accepted/rejected each point.
• If accepted, summary of how.
• If rejected, explain why.
• If inconsistencies between editor and reviewer,
  go with editor
• From talking with editors
• They have information overload w/ so many
  articles
• So they want response letter as written record of
  everything

8
Advanced Sources

• Reviewing scientific works in psychology,
  edited by Sternberg
• Good for information about process
• Good for how to review articles
• Guide to publishing in Psychology Journals,
  edited by Sternberg
• Third part of book is about Dealing with
  Referees and how to write for referees, how to
  read response letters, how to revise
• The Psychologists Companion,
  written by Sternberg
• Last few chapters about how to evaluate a paper,
  submit to journals, tips for gaining acceptance
• Some handouts