Skip to Main Content

Scholarly Publishing

Provides information about journals, books, and open access for authors looking to publish scholarly works.

Copyright Questions?

The University of Michigan Library Copyright Office provides help with copyright questions for University of Michigan faculty, staff and students. Please email us with questions or visit our website for more information.

Legal Advice

The information presented here is intended for informational purposes and should not be construed as legal advice. If you have specific legal questions pertaining to the University of Michigan, please contact the Office of the General Counsel.

If you require legal advice in your personal capacity, the lawyer referral services operated by the Washtenaw County Bar Association and the State Bar of Michigan may be helpful to you.

Peer Review Process for Scholarly Articles

While the peer review process for journals can vary, it typically follows the pattern shown in the flowchart and described below.

  1. Author submits article to a journal.
  2. Managing editor determines if it is suitable for review.
    1. If no, the submission is immediately rejected without being sent out to peer reviewers.
    2. If yes, the submission is distributed to peer reviewers.
  3. Peer reviewers recommend one of the following:
    1. Accept without revisions
    2. Accept pending revisions
    3. Reject
  4. After completing revisions, author resubmits the revised article to managing editor.
  5. The managing editor or peer reviewers determine if revisions are sufficient.
    1. If yes, the article is accepted for publication.
    2. If no, the article is rejected.
    3. If more revisions are required, author restarts at step 4.

Flowchart showing peer review process for scholarly articles.

Very few articles are accepted without revisions. Being asked to revise your work is a foundational practice in scholarly publishing, and often results in the work being stronger after it has undergone review.

Responding to Reviewers' Feedback

Below are resources that provide suggestions and guidelines for responding to reviewer feedback: