Publishing in English Language Social Science Journals Daniel T. Lichter Cornell University November 19, 2009

Preparation n Become familiar with English language social science journals that publish papers in your area of expertise n Become an expert: Read the relevant theoretical and empirical literature n Study how authors organize their papers n Subscribe to professional associations in your specialty area (e.g., PAA) n Pick a research topic of great interest in your field n Avoid narrow or “dead” topics

Writing a Paper for Submission n Write using clear English prose u Present draft at conference for feedback u Solicit honest reactions from colleagues u Edit, edit, edit u Co-author with colleagues, including English- speaking colleagues u Hire a good copy editor n Keep it short (about 25 pages of text) n Avoid excessive tables or graphs n Write concise informative abstract n State objectives early in paper n Put excessive technical material in appendix n Proofread your work more than once

Submission n Select appropriate journal n 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 RankScoreRankScoreRankScore American Sociologic Review American Journal of Sociology Social Forces Social Problems Administrative Science Quarterly Demography

Submission n Follow submission policy exactly n Use proper reference format n Short cover letter on University stationary n Eliminate any trace of prior rejection (no dates or when presented at conferences)

Peer Review n Publication based on objective evaluations by 2-4 anonymous referees n Factors considered in selecting reviewers: u Discipline u Professional rank or experience u Scholarly network or clique u Expertise related to topic, data, or methodology

Tips n Cite significant papers and authors dealing with the topic of paper n References should be up-to-date and accurate n Be generous in acknowledging previous studies n Don’t be excessively harsh in discussing previous studies n Clearly indicate your new contribution and its important implications

More Tips n Acknowledge limitations of your study n Don’t overstate your conclusions n Avoid making strong claims of causality n Avoid excessive speculation, especially on policy matters n If possible, keep value judgements to yourself (reviewers may have different ones)

Evaluation Criteria n Clear contribution to theory, data, methods, or findings n Interesting and well-written n Appropriate for audience of journal n Editor’s views or preferences (biases)

An Example n Demography u official publication of the Population Association of America u Over 3,000 members u Several different disciplines

Rejection n Most papers are rejected, often more than once u Rejection rates are highest in most prestigious journals n Resubmit rejected paper to another journal. Be persistent n Revisions should address criticisms of previous reviewers and editor n Reviewer is almost always right! n Do not write hostile letter to editor about negative decision

Revise and Resubmit n Revise paper and resubmit it within 2-3 months, but not before 1 month n Address all criticisms of reviewers n In letter to editor, respond to each reviewer’s comments n Avoid excessively long letters n Don’t attack or criticize the reviewers! Or the editor!

October 4, 2002 Professor Smart Department of Sociology Good University Town, 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 n Submit only one paper to a journal at a time n Keep 2-3 different papers under review at all times n Don’t submit your paper to a new journal if you’ve received a “revise and resubmit” from another journal n Agree to review manuscripts when asked

Publishing in English Language Social Science Journals GOOD LUCK!