Reviews and the Review Process

Review Process Paper is “finished” Have someone read it before it goes out Paper is submitted A vs. B vs. C journals—where to submit? Look for a good fit with the journal Put the paper in good APA style

Going through the process How long does the process take? What do you do with the reviews when they get back? How do you respond? (Always, especially to start with, have someone else read it!) Letter to the editor Remember that if someone says something is unclear, by definition, it IS unclear

Types of Decisions Accept Accept with revisions Revise and resubmit (to this journal vs. another one) Reject (with vs. without peer review)

Being a reviewer Typically about 3 reviewers Avoid ad hominem arguments Say at least something nice Talk about strengths and weaknesses Be on time! Skim before reading Flaws vs. fatal flaws

Things to look for by section Intro Method Results Discussion By type of paper Descriptive Ad Hoc Hypos Theoretical Hypos Think about what journal it was submitted to Think about what type of contribution it makes

For your reviews Use the evaluation form on Oleson & Arkin, p. 63 (form 4.1) Write a narrative review as well