Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Scholarly Publishing

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

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: