Editorial pubs.acs.org/ac
Rejections with Editorial Expertise and Without External Review: Are These Fair?
T
What else should you do? Think carefully about your suggested reviewers: if they do not fit the topic, are not experts in the field, or are from inappropriate institutions (such as your own), this suggests that you may not know the field well. If none of your manuscripts’ references are from analytical journals (not just Analytical Chemistry), the suggested reviewers are from other fields, or the topic appears well suited to another audience, you should explain in detail (in the cover letter) why the work should be published in Analytical Chemistry as opposed to another journal covering another field. If you do not use these opportunities to demonstrate the significance and relevance of your work, it certainly makes my job harder and also makes it more likely you will not like the final decision. I hope that this editorial helps to explain the initial editor review process. Be assured that the decision to reject a manuscript is based on the considerable scientific expertise of the Editor and Associate Editors of Analytical Chemistry. And a final plea: make my job more challenging by making a compelling case for publication in Analytical Chemistry, or if you cannot, consider that your work may be more suitable for submission elsewhere. Hopefully my goal and yours is the sameto see your best work published in Analytical Chemistry.
he topic of this editorial is the rejection of submitted manuscripts based on the expert review from our editors, without external review, a policy that has formally been in place in Analytical Chemistry for more than 8 years. This is an especially timely topic because I spent 2 weeks in India in October as part of an ACS editorial team visiting 13 institutes and universities, and I also spent a week in China in September, with a major focus of both trips revolving around Analytical Chemistry. In India, 12 Editors (including me) received many questions from ACS authors, and we observed much angst about the practice of rejecting an article based on internal editorial review. Many scientists expressed their concern that rejection of a manuscript without external review was somehow unfair. As hopefully is obvious to most, my goal, and the goal of the rest of the Analytical Chemistry editorial team, is to publish the best papers possible in Analytical Chemistry. Stated simply, there is no other reason for our evaluation and peer review process. We receive thousands of manuscripts and publish only a fraction of them. I believe that our current evaluation approach identifies the most significant of our submissions for publication. How do we determine which articles to publish? As Editor, I look at every Abstract and then for most, I read the cover letter. This initial review helps me to assess whether or not the manuscript falls with the scope of the journal (as defined in the author guidelines); if it does, I assign the paper to the appropriate Associate Editor. However, if the Abstract and/or cover letter raise a question about suitability, or if the article appears not to fit into an area the journal covers, I then spend a lot more time examining the manuscript in detail, starting at the Introduction, followed by the references, and eventually the entire paper. Most of the time, I determine that the manuscript does fit the journal and I assign it to an Associate Editor to handle, although this year I assigned several manuscripts to myself. Some, however, do not fit the scope of the journal or do not meet our standards. As gatekeeper for Analytical Chemistry, I reject these submissions. In many cases, I also consult with one or more of our Associate Editors having expertise in the appropriate topic before finalizing a decision to reject. I assume that no one wants their paper to be rejected based on the editor’s scientific expertise. Thus, let me give some advice to potential authors. Make it hard to reject your manuscript by writing a compelling cover letter, explaining why the work is important and why it fits the scope of Analytical Chemistry. Many submissions that get rejected include a cover letter that contains only a few sentences that basically state: “I want to publish this work in your journal.” This does not help your case. Do not cut your Abstract verbatim into the cover letter (or repeat it at the end of the Introduction). This does not help either! You are making a case for publication and so please put some thought into writing your cover letter and introduction that provides reasons to read (and publish) your manuscript. © 2012 American Chemical Society
■
Jonathan V. Sweedler, Editor-in-Chief, Analytical Chemistry AUTHOR INFORMATION
Notes
Views expressed in this editorial are those of the author and not necessarily the views of the ACS.
Published: November 13, 2012 10149
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ac303246t | Anal. Chem. 2012, 84, 10149−10149
