Annette,

I'm just finishing a stint as a journal editor. The turnover time varies 
extremely widely from journal to journal, depending on things like the 
size of staff, the ability to find willing reviewers, the willingness of 
the reviewers to actually do the work they have agreed to do, etc. You 
have faced what seems to me to be an inordinately long time, but not 
unusually long (esp. for APA which, in my experience, is worse than most 
at this sort of thing). I once waited ten months for /American 
Psychologist/ to tell me that they wouldn't even submit my paper to peer 
review! 

One thing I noted during my time as an editor was that "hard" scientists 
and medical types expect extremely short turnover times, leading me to 
believe that things are better (in science) outside of psychology. 
Humanities journals, by contrast, can be horrendously long (partly 
because of staff and funding issues, but partly because they just don't 
have the same sense of urgency about their work that scientists 
typically do).

I tried to get reviewers to do their work within one month (but I have a 
colleague who automatically rejects any review request that has a time 
line of less than six weeks).  I tried to get decisions back to authors 
within two months (giving me two weeks to find reviewers in the first 
place, and two weeks to read the reviews and make a decision 
afterwards), but I must admit that it typically extended to three 
months, and sometimes longer. This was primarily because many (perhaps 
half of?) reviewers have to be reminded, often multiple times, to do the 
job they have agreed to do. (My "favorite" moment, which happened not 
all that infrequently, was when, after multiple promises to get me a 
review -- "next week"... "this week"... "tomorrow" [I usually gave them 
double the time they had asked for before reminding them again] -- they 
would stop responding to e-mails and then claim that there must have 
been some technical problem with the internet connection.) Also, 
admittedly, my own life would get in the way sometimes, and with no 
other "senior" staff to spell me off, papers would pile up a bit.

In any case, there is no reason for editors to be curt with authors 
(unless they have so many submissions that they can afford to alienate 
people). My response -- even for those "busy" physicians who expected 
two-week turnarounds -- was "I am sorry for the delay," followed by an 
outline of the process in which I predicted it would take about twice 
the time it would probably actually take, so there would be no more 
disappointments down the line. :-)

Regards,
Chris
-- 

Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada

 

416-736-2100 ex. 66164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/

========================



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have had an article submitted last May which was returned in January for 
> revision; was resubmitted in less than two weeks and when my coauthor 
> contacted the editor basically got a curt email back that it's only been 
> since early Feb that it it was resubmitted, and, reading between the lines, 
> suggested we were highly unreasonable to expect anything back yet.
>
> In an era where so many important decisions (tenure, promotion, salary 
> raises) are based on pubs, in addition to the desire to see our work 
> disseminated (before someone else does, as we have freely shared all of our 
> prepub work and have already seen trickles without any reference to our 
> work!--directly written by people who had asked for prepub work from 
> conferences) we thought we were being very reasonable in waiting patiently 
> this long. I'd rather not name the journal. It is an APA journal, but not a 
> "biggee", like JEP.
>
> What is a proper turn around time for an editor to collect 3 reviews?
>
> Annette
>
> Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D.
> Professor of Psychology
> University of San Diego
> 5998 Alcala Park
> San Diego, CA 92110
> 619-260-4006
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
>   



---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Reply via email to