{"id":1989,"date":"2013-11-04T09:09:22","date_gmt":"2013-11-04T09:09:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals\/"},"modified":"2026-03-30T19:09:28","modified_gmt":"2026-03-30T13:39:28","slug":"peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals","title":{"rendered":"Peer review process and editorial decision making at journals"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><i><span style=\"font-size: 11.0pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 107%;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif;\">This article was originally published in 2013 and is being recirculated as part of Peer Review Week 2021.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/i><\/p>\n<p><strong>Peer review key highlights<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 11.0pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';\">Peer review is the process by which journals scrutinize and regulate the quality of content they publish, by inviting experts in the field to review and comment on manuscripts received.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 11.0pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';\">Manuscripts submitted to a journal first go through an initial screening by the editorial team.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 11.0pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';\">Those that clear the screening are sent to at least two experts for peer review.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 11.0pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';\">Peer reviewers independently make a recommendation to the journal editor as to whether the manuscript should be rejected or accepted (with or without revisions).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 11.0pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';\">The journal editor considers all the feedback from peer reviewers and makes an informed decision to accept or reject the manuscript.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span lang=\"EN-US\" style=\"font-size: 11.0pt;\" xml:lang=\"EN-US\"><span style=\"line-height: 107%;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif;\">The <\/span><\/span><\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/services\/other\/pre-submission-peer-review?utm_source=editageinsights&amp;utm_medium=article&amp;utm_campaign=202603\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: 11.0pt;\"><span style=\"line-height: 107%;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif;\">peer review<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><span lang=\"EN-US\" style=\"font-size: 11.0pt;\" xml:lang=\"EN-US\"><span style=\"line-height: 107%;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif;\"> process for journal publication is essentially a quality control mechanism. It is a process by which experts evaluate scholarly works, and its objective is to ensure a high quality of published science.<\/span><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\"> However, peer reviewers do not make the decision to accept or reject papers. At most, they recommend a decision. At peer-reviewed journals, decision-making authority rests solely with journal editors or the journal\u2019s editorial board. Indeed, it is the journal editor who is considered to be central to the decision making process.<sup style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular;\">1<\/sup><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#review-1\">Journal decision-making process<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#review-2\">Peer review<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#review-3\">Final decision<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#review-4\">Do peer reviewers and editors always agree on what&#8217;s worthy of publication?<\/a><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"review-1\" style=\"padding-top: 80px; margin-top: -80px;\">Journal decision-making process<\/h2>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Typically, after a paper is submitted to a journal, a journal editor screens the manuscript and decides whether or not to send it for full peer review. Only after clearing the initial screening is the manuscript sent to one or more peer reviewers. Finally, journal editors or the journal\u2019s editorial board consider the peer reviewers\u2019 reports and make the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript for publication.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"responsive\" title=\"Journal Decision Making Process\" src=\"http:\/\/insights.cactusglobal.com\/sites\/default\/files\/Journal%20Decision%20Making%20Process.png\" alt=\"Journal Decision Making Process\" data-file_info=\"%7B%22fid%22:%22274%22,%22view_mode%22:%22default%22,%22fields%22:%7B%22format%22:%22default%22,%22field_file_image_alt_text%5Bund%5D%5B0%5D%5Bvalue%5D%22:%22Journal%20Decision%20Making%20Process%22,%22field_file_image_title_text%5Bund%5D%5B0%5D%5Bvalue%5D%22:%22Journal%20Decision%20Making%20Process%22%7D,%22type%22:%22media%22%7D\" \/><\/p>\n<h3>Initial screening<\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Approximately 3 million manuscripts are submitted to journals every year.<sup style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular;\">1<\/sup>\u00a0Given the large volume of manuscript submissions, more and more journals follow a policy of screening papers before sending them for full peer review. During the initial screening, journal editors mainly check the following:\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"media-element file-default\" title=\"Default Title Text\" src=\"https:\/\/insights.cactusglobal.com\/sites\/default\/files\/Jour-Pub-Pro-Article1.jpg\" alt=\"Default Alt text\" \/><\/p>\n<div id=\"paginationdemo\" class=\"demo\" style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 13.63636302947998px;\">\n<div id=\"p1\" class=\"pagedemo _current\" style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 20px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; text-align: justify;\">\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Journal editors typically look at hundreds of manuscripts a year. One of the first items that editors will look at is the cover letter, and they may not get further than the cover letter if the study does not seem interesting enough. Therefore, it is imperative that authors craft a well-written cover letter that highlights the significance and strength of their research as well as provides a good reason why the manuscript is a good fit for the journal. Editors will then go through the abstract and may even skim through the introduction, figures and tables, or other sections of the paper to determine whether the manuscript passes their quality threshold.<\/span><\/span><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"media-element file-default\" style=\"font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; height: 200px; width: 200px; float: right; margin: 5px;\" title=\"Journal peer review\" src=\"https:\/\/insights.cactusglobal.com\/sites\/default\/files\/2013_12_10_11_54_50_Peer_review_and_editorial_decision_making_at_journals_Insights.png\" alt=\"Peer review at journals\" \/><span style=\"font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h3>Benefits of initial screening<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">If the manuscript clearly lies outside the scope of the journal, then a rapid rejection allows the author to quickly find and submit their manuscript to another journal.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Peer reviewers\u2019 time is wasted when they have to spend time evaluating and giving feedback for a manuscript of clearly inferior quality.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<h2 id=\"review-2\" style=\"padding-top: 80px; margin-top: -80px;\">Peer review<\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-align: justify;\">Once<\/span><span style=\"color: #111111; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 19.09090805053711px; text-align: justify;\">\u00a0a manuscript clears the initial screening, it is sent for <a href=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/services\/other\/pre-submission-peer-review?utm_source=editageinsights&amp;utm_medium=article&amp;utm_campaign=202603\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">peer review<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #111111; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 19.09090805053711px; text-align: justify;\">There are three common types of peer review for journal publication:<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"color: #111111; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 19.09090805053711px; text-align: justify;\"><strong>Single blind:<\/strong> names of reviewers are not revealed to authors<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"color: #111111; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 19.09090805053711px; text-align: justify;\"><strong>Double blind:<\/strong> names of reviewers and authors are not revealed to each other<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"color: #111111; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 19.09090805053711px; text-align: justify;\"><strong>Open peer review:<\/strong> Names of authors and reviewers are revealed to each other<\/span><!--pagebreak--><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div id=\"paginationdemo\" class=\"demo\" style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 13.63636302947998px;\">\n<div id=\"p2\" class=\"pagedemo _current\" style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 20px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; text-align: justify;\">\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit;\">Generally, a minimum of 2 peer reviewers (up to 6) are chosen for the peer review. Peer reviewers are ideally experts in their field. Journals usually build a pool of peer reviewers that have a good track record of producing high-quality reviews. Or they may scan the bibliography to identify potential reviewers or contact researchers they met at conferences and seminars.<\/span><sup style=\"font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit;\">1<\/sup><span style=\"font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit;\">\u00a0Many journals will first ask potential reviewers whether they are willing to review the manuscript before assigning them as reviewers.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><br style=\"font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\" \/><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\">Editors have to be careful to select reviewers who have sufficient subject matter expertise to do justice to the manuscript. Therefore, highly technical papers or papers from niche subject areas may take longer to review, because it may take editors some time to locate appropriate reviewers.<br style=\"font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\" \/><br style=\"font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\" \/>Some journals give authors the option of recommending preferred and non-preferred reviewers. Authors would do well to take advantage of this option if available as it can expedite the review process, since it saves the journal time in looking for reviewers. Furthermore, studies have found that author recommended peer reviewers tend to recommend acceptance more often than journal recommended reviewers.<sup style=\"font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\">4,5<\/sup><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\">The peer review is completed once all the reviewers send the journal a detailed report with their comments on the manuscript and their recommendation. Typically, journals ask reviewers to complete their reviews within 3-4 weeks.<\/span><sup style=\"font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\">6<\/sup><span style=\"font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\">\u00a0However, few journals have a mechanism to enforce the deadline, which is why it can be hard to predict how long the peer review process will take.<\/span><sup style=\"font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\">6<\/sup><span style=\"font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\">\u00a0<\/span><span style=\"font-size: 14px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: verdana, geneva, sans-serif;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"review-3\" style=\"padding-top: 80px; margin-top: -80px;\">Final decision<\/h2>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">The journal editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision. The following are the most common decisions that are made:<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">1. accept without any changes (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper in its original form<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">2. accept with minor revisions (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">3. accept after major revisions (conditional acceptance ): the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and\/or editors<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">4. revise and resubmit (conditional rejection): the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">5. reject the paper (outright rejection): the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">The first option (accept without any changes) is rare. The second decision (accept with minor revisions) is typically the best outcome authors should hope for. Once a journal rejects a paper outright, authors are well advised not to resubmit to the same journal. If the journal wanted to reconsider the paper, they would have issued a conditional rejection. An outright rejection means that the journal thinks the paper will not meet its publication standards or interests even after heavy revisions.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"responsive\" title=\"Journal editorial decision making\" src=\"http:\/\/insights.cactusglobal.com\/sites\/default\/files\/Editor%20speak.png\" alt=\"Editorial decision making\" data-file_info=\"%7B%22fid%22:%22471%22,%22view_mode%22:%22default%22,%22fields%22:%7B%22format%22:%22default%22,%22field_file_image_alt_text%5Bund%5D%5B0%5D%5Bvalue%5D%22:%22Editorial%20decision%20making%22,%22field_file_image_title_text%5Bund%5D%5B0%5D%5Bvalue%5D%22:%22Journal%20editorial%20decision%20making%22%7D,%22type%22:%22media%22%7D\" \/><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"review-4\" style=\"padding-top: 80px; margin-top: -80px;\">Do peer reviewers and editors always agree on what&#8217;s worthy of publication?<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Editors\u2019 decision-making policies vary: some reject when even one peer reviewer recommends rejection, some when the majority recommend rejection, and some only when all reviewers recommend rejection.<sup style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular;\">2<\/sup><\/span><\/span><!--pagebreak--><br style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 13.63636302947998px;\" \/><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">It is common for peer reviewers to give conflicting feedback on the same manuscript.<sup style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular;\">8,9<\/sup>\u00a0One journal editorial went as far as to say \u201cUnanimity between reviewers is rare.\u201d<sup style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular;\">10<\/sup>\u00a0In cases of conflicting feedback, the journal editor may choose to send the paper to a third reviewer before arriving at a decision, and the author may have to wait longer for the peer review process to be completed.\u00a0<br style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 13.63636302947998px;\" \/><br style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 13.63636302947998px;\" \/>In reality, reviewers tend to recommend acceptance more often than rejection.<sup style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular;\">10<\/sup>\u00a0Thus, journal editors end up rejecting many papers that peer reviewers actually recommended for publication, with their decisions based on their own opinions of the papers\u2019 publication worthiness. The role of peer review is considered to be helping authors improve their manuscripts rather than deciding whether they should be published, which is the journal editor\u2019s job.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"responsive\" title=\"Peer review decisions\" src=\"http:\/\/insights.cactusglobal.com\/sites\/default\/files\/Journal%20speak.png\" alt=\"Peer review decisions\" data-file_info=\"%7B%22fid%22:%22472%22,%22view_mode%22:%22default%22,%22fields%22:%7B%22format%22:%22default%22,%22field_file_image_alt_text%5Bund%5D%5B0%5D%5Bvalue%5D%22:%22Peer%20review%20decisions%22,%22field_file_image_title_text%5Bund%5D%5B0%5D%5Bvalue%5D%22:%22Peer%20review%20decisions%22%7D,%22type%22:%22media%22%7D\" \/><\/p>\n<h2>Conclusion<\/h2>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Because of a large number of submissions, top-tier journals are often forced to reject even high quality manuscripts for various reasons, like a large number of submissions or lack of fit with the journal\u2019s editorial focus.<sup style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular;\">2<\/sup>\u00a0While reviewers and editors easily agree on what is clearly not acceptable for publication, deciding what is worthy of publication is a tougher challenge.<sup style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular;\">12<\/sup>\u00a0Finally, journal editors make decisions to accept or reject papers based on their opinion of the papers\u2019 publication worthiness and reviewers\u2019 comments.<sup style=\"font-family: GandhiSansRegular;\">10<\/sup><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/understanding-peer-review-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><strong>Click here<\/strong><\/a> to view a short presentation on this topic!<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Also see the following questions in our Q&amp;A forum about the journal editorial process:<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li class=\"opHeading sub-hd\" style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 15px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 40px; color: #008ae0; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/what-are-the-first-things-journal-editors-look-at-in-a-submission-package\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">What are the first things journal editors look at in a submission package?<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li class=\"opHeading sub-hd\" style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 15px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 40px; color: #008ae0; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/how-long-should-i-wait-for-a-response-from-the-journal\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">How long should I wait for a response from the journal?<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li class=\"opHeading sub-hd\" style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 15px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 40px; color: #008ae0; text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/what-is-the-meaning-of-decision-in-process-status\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">What is the meaning of &#8220;decision in process&#8221; status?<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 class=\"opHeading sub-hd\" style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 15px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 40px; color: #008ae0; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\"><a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit;\">Bibliography<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n<div><\/div>\n<ul class=\"listshort\" style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: GandhiSansRegular; font-size: 13px; list-style: none;\">\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (2011).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/www.publications.parliament.uk\/pa\/cm201012\/cmselect\/cmsctech\/856\/856vw.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Peer review in scientific publications<\/a>\u00a0Vol 1. House of Commons: London, UK.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Schultz DM (2010).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/journals.ametsoc.org\/doi\/abs\/10.1175\/2009BAMS2908.1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Rejection rates for journals publishing in the atmospheric sciences<\/a>. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 91(2): 231-243. doi: 10.1175\/2009BAMS2908.1.]<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Thomson Reuters (2011). Increasing the quality and timeliness of peer review: A report for scholarly publishers [white paper]. Available at:\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/scholarone.com\/media\/pdf\/peerreviewwhitepaper.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">http:\/\/scholarone.com\/media\/pdf\/peerreviewwhitepaper.pdf<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Hutchings A (2006).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/jama.ama-assn.org\/content\/295\/3\/314.full\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Differences in review quality and recommendations for publication between peer reviewers suggested by authors or by editors<\/a>. JAMA, 295(3): 314-317.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Wager E, Parkin EC, Tamber PS (2006).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/www.biomedcentral.com\/1741-7015\/4\/13\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Are reviewers suggested by authors as good as those chosen by editors? Results of a rater-blinded, retrospective study<\/a>. BMC Medicine, 4: 13. doi: 10.1186\/1741-7015-4-13.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Association of Learned and Professional Society (2000).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"https:\/\/www.alpsp.org\/Reports-Publications\/current-practice-in-peer-review-2000\/125525\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Current practice in peer review. Results of a survey conducted during Oct\/Nov 2000<\/a>. Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers: Worthing, UK.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Samet JM (1999).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/aje.oxfordjournals.org\/content\/150\/5\/433.short\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Dear author-advice from a retiring editor<\/a>. American Journal of Epidemiology, 150(5): 433-436.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Rothwell PM &amp; Martyn CN (2000).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/brain.oxfordjournals.org\/content\/123\/9\/1964.full\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone?<\/a>\u00a0Brain, 123(9): 1964\u20139.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Ray JG (2002).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/qjmed.oxfordjournals.org\/content\/95\/12\/769.long\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Judging the judges: The role of journal editors<\/a>\u00a0(editorial). Quarterly Journal of Medicine, 95: 769-74.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Coronel R (1999).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/cardiovascres.oxfordjournals.org\/content\/43\/2\/261.full\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The role of the reviewer in editorial decision-making<\/a>. Cardiovascular Research, 43(2): 261-64. doi: 10.1016\/S0008-6363(99)00177-7.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Nature. Peer-review policy. Last accessed August 4, 2011. Available at:\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/www.nature.com\/authors\/policies\/peer_review.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">http:\/\/www.nature.com\/authors\/policies\/peer_review.html<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 3px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; list-style-type: decimal;\"><span style=\"font-family: verdana,geneva,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14px;\">Howard L &amp; Wilkinson G (1999).\u00a0<a style=\"border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; color: #1b609a;\" href=\"http:\/\/www.nel.edu\/userfiles\/articlesnew\/NEL200599E03.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Peer review and editorial decision-making<\/a>. Neuroendocrinology Letters, 20(5): 256-260.<\/span><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This article was originally published in 2013 and is being recirculated as part of Peer Review Week 2021. Peer review key highlights Peer review is the process by which journals scrutinize and regulate the quality of content they publish, by inviting experts in the field to review and comment on manuscripts received. Manuscripts submitted to [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":45370,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2394],"tags":[973,539,1046],"new_categories":[],"new_tags":[],"series":[2786],"class_list":["post-1989","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-basics-of-peer-review","tag-journal-decision","tag-peer-review-process","tag-submission-process","series-status-descriptions-in-journal-submission-systems"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v25.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Peer Review and Editorial Decision Making Process at Journals | Editage Insights<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"This article explains each stage of the journal decision making process and common decisions made during peer review.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Peer Review and Editorial Decision Making Process at Publishing Journals\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Journal decision-making process is a part of manuscript publication. Authors would benefit greatly by becoming familiar with each stage of the journal decision-making process.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Editage Insights\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Editage\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2013-11-04T09:09:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-03-30T13:39:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1536\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editage Insights\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@Editage\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Editage\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editage Insights\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editage Insights\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/71ff452a0868e4716ad471b4a1ed6df6\"},\"headline\":\"Peer review process and editorial decision making at journals\",\"datePublished\":\"2013-11-04T09:09:22+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-30T13:39:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals\"},\"wordCount\":1614,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png\",\"keywords\":[\"journal decision\",\"peer review process\",\"submission process\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Basics of Peer Review\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals\",\"name\":\"Peer Review and Editorial Decision Making Process at Journals | Editage Insights\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2013-11-04T09:09:22+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-30T13:39:28+00:00\",\"description\":\"This article explains each stage of the journal decision making process and common decisions made during peer review.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png\",\"width\":1024,\"height\":1536},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Peer review process and editorial decision making at journals\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/\",\"name\":\"Editage Insights\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Editage Insights\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/editage-insights-logo-1-scaled.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/editage-insights-logo-1-scaled.webp\",\"width\":2560,\"height\":324,\"caption\":\"Editage Insights\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Editage\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Editage\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/71ff452a0868e4716ad471b4a1ed6df6\",\"name\":\"Editage Insights\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9d33a4703576af04935cc28dc48b743638328ea5bb37abe951330e2024defb9e?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9d33a4703576af04935cc28dc48b743638328ea5bb37abe951330e2024defb9e?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editage Insights\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/editage-insights\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Peer Review and Editorial Decision Making Process at Journals | Editage Insights","description":"This article explains each stage of the journal decision making process and common decisions made during peer review.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Peer Review and Editorial Decision Making Process at Publishing Journals","og_description":"Journal decision-making process is a part of manuscript publication. Authors would benefit greatly by becoming familiar with each stage of the journal decision-making process.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals","og_site_name":"Editage Insights","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Editage","article_published_time":"2013-11-04T09:09:22+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-03-30T13:39:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":1536,"url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Editage Insights","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@Editage","twitter_site":"@Editage","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editage Insights","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals"},"author":{"name":"Editage Insights","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/71ff452a0868e4716ad471b4a1ed6df6"},"headline":"Peer review process and editorial decision making at journals","datePublished":"2013-11-04T09:09:22+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-30T13:39:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals"},"wordCount":1614,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png","keywords":["journal decision","peer review process","submission process"],"articleSection":["Basics of Peer Review"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals","name":"Peer Review and Editorial Decision Making Process at Journals | Editage Insights","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png","datePublished":"2013-11-04T09:09:22+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-30T13:39:28+00:00","description":"This article explains each stage of the journal decision making process and common decisions made during peer review.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-08_37_43-AM-1-1.png","width":1024,"height":1536},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Peer review process and editorial decision making at journals"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/","name":"Editage Insights","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#organization","name":"Editage Insights","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/editage-insights-logo-1-scaled.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/editage-insights-logo-1-scaled.webp","width":2560,"height":324,"caption":"Editage Insights"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Editage","https:\/\/x.com\/Editage"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/71ff452a0868e4716ad471b4a1ed6df6","name":"Editage Insights","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9d33a4703576af04935cc28dc48b743638328ea5bb37abe951330e2024defb9e?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9d33a4703576af04935cc28dc48b743638328ea5bb37abe951330e2024defb9e?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editage Insights"},"url":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/editage-insights"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1989","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1989"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1989\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":45918,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1989\/revisions\/45918"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/45370"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1989"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1989"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1989"},{"taxonomy":"new_categories","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/new_categories?post=1989"},{"taxonomy":"new_tags","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/new_tags?post=1989"},{"taxonomy":"series","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.editage.com\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/series?post=1989"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}