Publishing in English Language Social Science Journals

Daniel T. Lichter

Cornell University

November 19, 2009

Preparation Become familiar with English language social

science journals that publish papers in your area of expertise

Become an expert: Read the relevant theoretical and empirical literature

Study how authors organize their papers Subscribe to professional associations in your

specialty area (e.g., PAA) Pick a research topic of great interest in your

field Avoid narrow or “dead” topics

Writing a Paper for Submission Write using clear English prose

Present draft at conference for feedback Solicit honest reactions from colleagues Edit, edit, edit Co-author with colleagues, including English-

speaking colleagues Hire a good copy editor

Keep it short (about 25 pages of text) Avoid excessive tables or graphs Write concise informative abstract State objectives early in paper Put excessive technical material in appendix Proofread your work more than once

Submission

Select appropriate journal Consider (inter)discipline,

specialty, prestige, impact score, and discipline

Core Influence Scores, Total Influence Scores and Impact Factor Scores for Top Journals in Sociology

Journal

Core Influence

Total Influence

Impact Factor

Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score

American Sociologic Review 1 8.3 3 64 2 2.2

American Journal of Sociology

2 7.4 6 54 8 1.8

Social Forces 3 3.0 15 23 24 1.0

Social Problems 4 2.2 11 33 22 1.0

Administrative Science Quarterly

5 1.7 2 84 5 1.9

Demography 6 1.5 22 17 17 1.2

Submission

Follow submission policy exactly Use proper reference format Short cover letter on University

stationary Eliminate any trace of prior

rejection (no dates or when presented at conferences)

Peer Review

Publication based on objective evaluations by 2-4 anonymous referees

Factors considered in selecting reviewers: Discipline Professional rank or experience Scholarly network or clique Expertise related to topic, data, or

methodology

Tips

Cite significant papers and authors dealing with the topic of paper

References should be up-to-date and accurate

Be generous in acknowledging previous studies

Don’t be excessively harsh in discussing previous studies

Clearly indicate your new contribution and its important implications

More Tips

Acknowledge limitations of your study Don’t overstate your conclusions Avoid making strong claims of causality Avoid excessive speculation, especially

on policy matters If possible, keep value judgements to

yourself (reviewers may have different ones)

Evaluation Criteria

Clear contribution to theory, data, methods, or findings

Interesting and well-written Appropriate for audience of journal Editor’s views or preferences

(biases)

An Example

Demography official publication of the

Population Association of America Over 3,000 members Several different disciplines

DEMOGRAPHY__________________Reviewer's Evaluation Sheet

Reviewer:Ms#: 01-0Date Mailed:

Title:

(Please circle appropriate number in each category)

Ideas:Theoryconceptualcontribution

5Outstandingand Creative

4Above

Average

3Average

2Small

Contribution

1No Theory

Findings:Contributionto knowledge

5Very Important

4Important

3Modest

2Trivial

1None

Adequacy ofevidence

5Excellent

4Substantial

3Adequate

2Incomplete

1Vague

Methods ofAnalysis

5Appropriately chosen& properly performed

4Adequate

3Minor

problems

2Major

problems

1Totally

Inadequate

Style ofwriting

5Excellent

4Readable

3Minor

problems

2Major

problems

1Unintelligible

Interest toDemographyReaders

5Of interest to almost

all Demographyreaders

4Of interest tomajority of

Demographyreaders

3Of interestto less than

half ofreaders

2Of interest to

very fewDemography

readers

1Not relevant toDemography

readers

Recommendations:

____Accept, subject to minor editorial revisions

____Accept, if shortened to research note length

____ Suggest revision and resubmission

____ Reject Outright

____ Not appropriate for Demography. Submitelsewhere. Please indicate alternate journal.

_________________________________________

Please return this form with yourcomments to the author and reportto the editor within 3 to 4 weeks ofreceipt.

Mail to:Editorial Office of Demography300 Bricker Hall190 N Oval MallColumbus, OH 43210

Rejection

Most papers are rejected, often more than once Rejection rates are highest in most

prestigious journals Resubmit rejected paper to another

journal. Be persistent Revisions should address criticisms of

previous reviewers and editor Reviewer is almost always right! Do not write hostile letter to editor about

negative decision

Revise and Resubmit

Revise paper and resubmit it within 2-3 months, but not before 1 month

Address all criticisms of reviewers In letter to editor, respond to each

reviewer’s comments Avoid excessively long letters Don’t attack or criticize the

reviewers! Or the editor!

October 4, 2002

Professor SmartDepartment of SociologyGood UniversityTown, State, Country

Dear Professor Smart:

We have now completed the review of your paper on “xxxxxxxxxx" (#02-093). Although I cannot accept your paper for publication in Demography, I am willing to consider a revised version that attends to the concerns of the reviewers.

As you can tell, the reviewers believe that your paper deals with an important and interesting topic (as do I), but they also raise numerous questions and methodological concerns about your approach and empirical findings. My invitation to "revise and resubmit" therefore is no guarantee of eventual publication in Demography. I will say, however, that your paper covers new ground in the welfare debate by examining welfare recidivism. I also think this is a topic of great concern to our readers.

Obviously, it will be important for you to address the most serious criticisms of the two reviewers. I will not try to summarize all of them here or micro-manage your revision. Their concerns are stated rather unambiguously and, after reading the paper myself, they seem mostly on target to me. For example, in assessing the effects of economic conditions, I share Reviewer A's concerns about the limited number of state economic variables in your models. Both reviewers have problems with the construction and interpretation of the various interaction effects. They also raise concerns about whether your policy variables adequately measure the impact of certain policies that potentially affect returning to welfare (e.g., diversion programs). I also am troubled by Reviewer B's claim that a sizeable share of the non-returnees are no longer eligible for welfare because their children have left home. In this case, neither policy nor economic conditions will play a role in explaining welfare returns.

If you decide to “revise and resubmit” to Demography, a letter should accompany your revised paper which clearly indicates your responses to the points made by the reviewers. If you choose another approach, please let me know your reasons.

I will likely send the paper to an original reviewer (probably Reviewer A) and a new reviewer for a final recommendation.

Thank you for allowing us to consider your work for Demography. I look forward to receiving your paper at your earliest convenience.

Sincerely,

Other lessons

Submit only one paper to a journal at a time

Keep 2-3 different papers under review at all times

Don’t submit your paper to a new journal if you’ve received a “revise and resubmit” from another journal

Agree to review manuscripts when asked

Publishing in English Language Social Science Journals

GOOD LUCK!