Tags: Essay Catcher In The Rye ReviewCreating Essay OutlineHuman Rights Essay TopicsZipcar Business PlanHomework For Grade 5The Political Economy Of Hunger Selected EssaysGold Mining Business PlanArgumentative Essay ArticlesEssay On Man Pope Epistle 1Papers Research
I think mine is different in two aspects: 1) the fields, and hence the common practices, are generally different.
Potential reviewers land on the radar of journal editors in a variety of ways: They may have recently landed a tenure-track position, been lead author on a standout paper or even given a compelling talk at a conference.
But how, exactly, does a reviewer approach the manuscript-review process?
EDIT: I forgot to mention that my paper is available online, both on my home page and the ar Xiv.
EDIT: In Citing a paper under review in 2 different conferences there is a somewhat similar situation.
Here are 10 keys from editors of APA journals to guide you: At its core, a manuscript review is made up of three sections: After you have read the manuscript—and before you start writing—scour the journal and pay attention to how the articles are presented.
Take note of the formatting, the order of the sections and the level of detail expected in the articles.
Be sure that you have a clear understanding of the journal’s intended audience.
Editors will often give you a list of instructions for your review as well. Also, find out the journal’s policy regarding reviewer anonymity.
Unless you accept the manuscript as is—an extremely rare decision—you need to suggest ways to improve the paper for resubmission.
You also may choose to weigh in on whether the article would be a better fit for another publication.