e d i to ri a l
Editorial Review Policy T
Number of manuscripts
This Editorial announces an Editorial Review Policy that is he Editors and the Editorial Advisory Board of Analytical Chemistry take satisfaction in the journal’s good record of already in use but has now become a formalized process. It service to the analytical community. By communicating signif- has been discussed with the journal’s Advisory Board. The Policy is that some submitted manuscripts, upon evaluation icant, rigorously peer reviewed research, Analytical Chemistry by an Editor—often in consultation with another Editor—will leads its world of scholarly publications by whatever benchbe declined without further review. If this decision is appealed mark one chooses. The authors are to be congratulated for by the author, he or she must present a strongly cogent reatheir creative scholarship and the reviewers for their critical son for reconsideration of the paper. The criteria employed by evaluations—which invariably improve the published paper. the Editors in declining a manuscript without peer review are The journal’s high quality has evoked increasing interest the following: The science among authors worldwide. lies outside the scope of The chart (right) tracks Analytical Chemistry Manuscript Flow Analytical Chemistry, the annual numbers of 2500 does not meet its stansubmitted papers since dards, or is narrowly 1991. In the second half 2000 focused rather than of of 2004, roughly onebroad, general appeal; quarter of the papers were the work is a routine exby authors who were sub1500 tension or minor technimitting to the journal for Received Published cal improvement of rethe first time. A substantial 1000 search already published; fraction of the manuscripts insufficient data are proare of very high quality; vided to properly subothers, while technically 500 stantiate the claims and good, are more incremenconclusions made; the tal. The best papers are 0 manuscript does not offer adding significantly to our 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Year a significant, original, or analytical knowledge. improved application of However, the sheer volknown methods to an important analyte; or the manuscript is ume of manuscript flow presents a dilemma to the Editors: a resubmission of a paper that has been previously declined, How can the papers be peer reviewed at a reliably critical level, without the addition of adequate new science. when the body of expert and available reviewers is not growing The above Policy is designed to protect the continuing as quickly? The peer review community is being stressed by the high quality of research published in Analytical Chemistry, to growing workload, and the Editors are concerned about maingive the affected segment of our authors a speedier response taining the rigor of the reviews. (which facilitates submission to an alternate journal), and to It is important to remember that the Editors of Analytical provide some relief to our burdened reviewer community. Chemistry are themselves active, senior scholars with very broad expertise. They are expert reviewers in a general sense and have in-depth knowledge in many areas. Decisions about a manuscript’s suitability are already fully entrusted to the assigned Editor, who is advised by the peer reviewers but who accepts full responsibility for decisions regarding publication.
© 2005 AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
J U N E 1 , 2 0 0 5 / A N A LY T I C A L C H E M I S T R Y
205 A
