Page 117 - How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper, 8th Edition 8th Edition

Page 117

In short, preacceptance problems are normally within the province of the editor, whereas postacceptance problems are
within the bailiwick of the managing editor. However, from my years of experience as a managing editor, I can tell
you that there seems to be one fundamental law that everybody subscribes to: "Whenever anything goes wrong, blame
the managing editor."

Page 119

PEANUTS reprinted by permission of United Feature Syndicate, Inc.

THE REVIEW PROCESS

You, as an author, should have some idea of the whys and wherefores of the review process. Therefore, I will describe
the policies and procedures that are typical in most editorial offices. If you can understand (and perhaps even
appreciate) some of the reasons for the editorial decisions that are made, perhaps in time you can improve the
acceptance rate of your manuscripts, simply by knowing how to deal with editors.

When your manuscript first arrives at the journal editorial office, the editor (or the managing editor, if the journal has
one) makes several preliminary decisions. First, is the manuscript concerned with a subject area covered by the scope
of the journal? If it clearly is not, the manuscript is immediately returned to the submitting author, along with a short
statement pointing to the reason for the action. Seldom would an author be able to challenge such a decision
successfully, and it is usually pointless to try. It is an important part of the editor's job to define the scope of the
journal, and editors I have known seldom take kindly to

Page 120

suggestions by authors, no matter how politely the comments are phrased, that the editor is somehow incapable of
defining the basic character of his or her journal. Remember, however, that such a decision is not rejection of your

file:///C|/...0208%20Books%20(part%201%20of%203)/How%20to%20write%20&%20publish%20scientific%20paper/18.htm[4/27/2009 1:09:12 PM]