Skip to Main Content

Scholarly publishing

Grasping the editorial process

What is the context of this process?

To understand the context of this process, start with the fact that journal articles present original research so they are primary sources, meaning that:

  • they have not been previously published, 
  • they contribute to the body of scientific knowledge, 
  • it has been reviewed by a team of peers.

Published is a work that has gone through the peer review process, and appears in a journal with an ISSN or as a standalone work with an ISBN. Submitting your work on a preprint repository is an informal way of publishing and is not considered as official publication. By submitting your work to a peer reviewed journal, you unconditionally agree to the circulation and discussion of the manuscript.The article that goes through the peer review process is confidential and privileged however since publisher polices differ, you need to check the journal's submission guidelines and instructions to authors.


What is the editor's role?

Journal editors look for manuscripts that:

  • contribute significantly to the content area that the journal covers
  • communicate with clarity and conciseness
  • follow the journal's style guidelines

What are the types of peer review process?

There are several types of peer review process:

  • Single-blind peer review: the reviewers know that you are the author of the article, but you don’t know the identities of the reviewers. This is the most common type of peer review for science and medicine journals. The anonymity of the reviewers is intended to make it easier for them to give full and honest feedback on an article, without fearing that the author will hold this against them.
  • Double-blind peer review: the reviewers don’t know that you are the author of the article. And you don’t know who the reviewers are either. Double-anonymous review is particularly common in the humanities and some social sciences. Many researchers prefer double-anonymous review because they believe it will give their paper a fairer chance than single blind review. It can avoid the risk of a paper suffering from the unintended bias of reviewers who know the seniority, gender, or nationality of a paper’s author.
  • Open peer review: There is no one agreed definition of open peer review. Typically, it will mean that the reviewers know you are the author and also that their identity will be revealed to you at some point during the review or publication process. Open review may also include publishing the names of the reviewers and even the reviewers’ reports alongside the article. Some open review journals also publish any earlier versions of your article, enabling the reader to see what revisions were made as a result of peer review.
  • Post-publication peer review: In these models, your paper may still go through one of the forms of peer review outlined above first. Alternatively, it may be published online almost immediately after some basic checks. Either way, once it is published, there will then be an opportunity for invited reviewers or even readers to add their own comments or reviews.
  • Registered reports: The Registered Reports process splits peer review into two parts. The first round of peer review takes place after you’ve designed your study but before you’ve collected or analyzed any data. This allows you to get feedback on both the question you’re looking to answer, and the experiment you’ve designed to test it. If your manuscript passes peer review, the journal will give you an in-principle acceptance (IPA). This indicates that your article will be published as long as you successfully complete your study according to the pre-registered methods and submit an evidence-based interpretation of the results.
  • Peer review with F1000Research: F1000Research operates formally invited post-publication peer review, which is fully open and transparent, and led by the article authors. Reviewers are usually suggested by the authors following certain reviewer criteria. Peer review reports are published – alongside the reviewers’ full names and affiliations – as soon as they’re submitted and remain attached to the article if it is indexed with sites such as PubMed and Scopus.Peer review directly determines whether an article will be indexed, via the approval status that reviewers select when reviewing the article.

Manuscript decisions

Reviewers provide the editor with evaluations of a manuscript on the basis of their assessment of the scholarly quality of the manuscript.

  • Acceptance: The manuscript enters the publication phase meaning that authors are responsible for preparing the paperwork. After the manuscript is typeset, authors receive proofs and are encouraged to review for typesetting errors and make minor changes. 
  • Invitation to revise and resubmit: Articles in this category have the potential to be published but they are not ready yet, meaning that authors may need to revisit and work on particular sections of the article, or make additions. 
  • Rejection: A manuscript is usually rejected if it is: 
    • not seen inside the scope and content of the journal
    • considered as weak or invalid in terms of design, analysis, or interpretation of the findings
    • not contributing enough to the body of knowledge