Frequent Reasons for Journals Rejection of Manuscripts Submitted for Publication

1
Frequent Reasons for Journals Rejection of
Manuscripts Submitted for Publication

• Debra A. Murphy, Ph.D.
• Health Risk Reduction Projects
• Integrated Substance Abuse Program
• Department of Psychiatry, UCLA

2
Submission Reviewer

• Author on over 100 published papers
  approximately 36 first-authored

• Reviewer for over 20 journals, including
• Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology
  -- Journal of Adolescence
• Health Psychology -- AIDS Education
  Prevention
• Child Development -- Journal of
  Womens Health
• Journal of Pediatric Psychology --
  AIDS Care
• JAIDS -- AIDS Behavior
• Family Planning Perspectives
• Journal of Marital and Family Therapy

• Other
• Editorial Board, Health Psychology, 1995 - 1996
• Associate Editor, Health Psychology, 1996 - 1999

3
Typical Review Categories

• Acceptable for publication with minor revisions
• Acceptable for publication with major revisions
• Rejection with opportunity to revise
• Reject

4
Health Psychology

• Comments to Editor
• Accept as is
• Accept if suitably revised (Minor Revisions)
• Reconsider after Major Revisions (if you use this
  category, please give specific reasons on another
  page)
• Reject (please give specific reasons on another
  page)

5
AIDS Care

• Merit of paper
• Not suitable for publication in AIDS Care
• Acceptable without revision
• Acceptable with revision not requiring
  reconsideration by referee
• Acceptable with revision and reconsideration by
  referee
• Acceptable as a short report

6
Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology

• Recommend acceptance unconditionally. Article of
  unusual merit.
• Recommend acceptance. Article has sufficient
  merit.
• In present form
• With revision indicated on second part of this
  report.
• As a condensed Brief Report because of highly
  specialized interest.
• Recommend rejection.
• With some reluctance
• Unqualifiedly

7
Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology
(cont)

• Reasons for rejection (check all that apply)
• Insufficiently important
• Inappropriate for JCCP
• Faulty in conception or design (please specify)
• Poor presentation or communication
• Preliminary -- not ready for publication
• Faulty conclusion
• Other reason (please specify) _____________

8
Examples/Acceptance RatesJournal of Abnormal
Child Psychology
9
Examples/Acceptance RatesHealth Psychology
10
Manuscript Submission TotalsHealth Psychology
11
General Issues

• Not a good match for the journal
• Outside the scope of the journal
• Manuscript type unacceptable (e.g., case report)

12
Targeting the Correct Journal

• Try to select journal prior to or during writing

• Check for journal requirements
• Check sample articles for length and style
• Stick to word limits, margin requirements, and
  indicated reference style

13
Selection of Journal

• Read journal content description

• Review table of contents for last several issues

• Check reference lists

14
Other General Issues

• Does not add to the literature
• Major issue
• Need to re-think purpose

15
Other (More Minor) General Issues

• Style formatting

• Overall paper too long
• Sections of paper too lengthy

16
Introduction Issues

• Missing key literature
• Not sufficient review of primary conceptual
  issues needed to support hypotheses

17
Methodological Issues

• Sampling plan not clearly specified
• criteria for inclusion/exclusion
• sampling procedures

• Procedures for assessment need to be clarified
• Refusal rates and response rates not presented,
  which calls into question the utility of the
  sample

18
Methodological Issues (cont)

• Single item measures

• Development of new items when standard scales
  available
• Measures not targeted specifically, or targeted
  to outcomes
• Quality control

19
Results Issues

• Results section is the only place where results
  should be reported
• Do not introduce new results in Discussion

• Review journal guidelines
• Archives of Pediatrics Adolescent medicine not
  interested in p values wish to see point
  estimates and 95 confidence intervals

20
Results Issues (cont)

• Redundant information in tables and text

• Statistical vs. clinical significance
• Tables without sufficient methodological
  information

21
Results Issues (cont)

• Results mixed with description of methods and/or
  conclusions

• Claims are made but the data are not shown
• Failure to deal adequately with confounding
  variables

22
Discussion Issues

• Summary of Results

• Parallel Structure
• Addition to the literature
• Not going beyond the data

23
Discussion Issues

• Appropriate presentation/discussion of results
• Not using effect if association
• Not implying change in cross-sectional

24
Suggestions Pre-submission

• Review with key points covered today in mind

Outside review
25
Suggestions Pre-submission

• Title and Abstract completed close to final draft

Use spell-checker AND proof read
26
Responding to Reviewer Comments

• Construct detailed reply, with numbered sections
  corresponding to reviewer points

• Describe briefly each change, refer to relevant
  pg. in manuscript
• If changes recommended that you are sure are
  wrong, present rationale

27
Responding to Reviewer Comments (cont)

• If asked to shorten, do so and state by how much

• Note agreements with what they write acknowledge
  contribution
• Do not skip over reviewer points

28
Summary

• Journal guidelines

• Review carefully with key points from this
  outline in mind

• Outside review prior to submission