Submitting and following up on your article

Many journals now have an electronic submission process in which the author registers, submits, and follows up on the disposition of the article on an online site. Other journals continue to have submission by email. Both types tend to have detailed instructions for exactly what is to be submitted and in what form—be sure to understand and follow them. If your submission is by email, be sure to use an appropriate subject line at the top, and be sure that you receive an acknowledgment that it has been received. If you don’t receive one within several weeks, check with the journal.

Some journals tell prospective authors on their site or in the acknowledgment of submission how soon the journal hopes to be able to tell the author whether the article will be reviewed further. If it has been that amount of time and you have not heard from the journal, it is fine (and wise) to send a brief, polite letter of inquiry (making sure to include the exact title of your submission and the date, and an appropriate subject line).

Tip:

Most Russian authors are accustomed to manuscripts that are single-spaced, small font, and right-justified (all the words on the right side of each line are even with each other vertically), often with hyphens to break words at the line ending.  But most journals want manuscripts to be submitted with double spacing (sometimes 1.5), 12-point font (sometimes 10)(usually Times New Roman), and with no right justification or hyphens (like this text).  This makes it easier to review and work with the manuscript, and then when the final version is published they will put it into the journal's format. It's very important to check and follow these instructions, because if you don't it will be very obvious instantly when they see your manuscript that you didn't pay attention. Some journals also caution authors not to follow how articles look in their journal, rather, follow the instructions, all of them. 

Peer review and acceptance

In today’s academic publishing environment, it’s very good to reach the stage of peer review. Journals have access to only a certain number of reviewers for a given topic and need to use these resources in the best way, so it is a sign that the article is promising. Many authors here who have participated in peer review also have felt that it significantly improved their work, and they were grateful to have this input from people who are experts in their field as part of the next stage in their development.

In any case, the bottom line is that peer review is also work for the author. It is almost unheard-of that an article is accepted exactly as it was submitted, and almost every author will go through the process of peer review, sometimes in several rounds. There are several types (double blind, single blind, collaborative, and others), but in any case the author(s) will be communicating with the reviewers about the content and the presentation of their article. Wallwork’s book (see Resources) has an extensive section on peer review and examples of communicating effectively with the reviewers. Additionally, usually there are detailed instructions from the journal for how to resubmit the article showing the author’s revisions that must be followed carefully. 

Although authors should explain why they did not follow a suggestion that was offered, authors are under no obligation to accept the suggestions of one or more of the peer reviewers—the author is the author, and it’s just a matter of whether the journal wants to accept the article in the form in which the author is willing to finalize it. The author has the right to withdraw the article. (The farther along it is in the process of review, acceptance, and publishing, the more it is frowned on, but it is possible, especially in the peer review stage, if there appear to be unresolvable differences of opinion or other reasons.) Any request by the author to withdraw the article should be made in writing and preferably receive a written confirmation from the journal in return.

Peer review may take some time, but journals are interested in having it proceed as efficiently as possible, so it is the responsibility of the reviewers and the author(s) to be prompt in their replies. Peer reviewers are to be polite to authors. Authors in turn should remember that peer reviewers are not paid for their work and are usually busy academics.  Some journals now limit the number of times that the article will be passed between the reviewer(s) and the author(s), so it's especially important to be very thorough at all stages.  

Again, the final version of the article is up to you: the journal cannot force an author to make any changes. If there are changes that the reviewers wish to be made that the author does not agree with, it is the author's right not to agree, and the journal can accept it as it is (or not accept) or the author can withdraw it from submission. If it is accepted, the version that is published is the one that has been reviewed by the author in the "proof" stage before the article goes online or in print, and there is no content that hasn't been done by the author.   

Note that according to international standards, a journal cannot "un-accept" an article, once it has been accepted in writing, unless there are very compelling reasons related to the content and/or ethics. 

The author or corresponding author should receive a proof of the article before it is published—an exact version of what will be published. While this is not the time to make changes in the article, authors are to check the proof carefully word for word and notify the journal of any errors or corrections, usually within 3 to 5 days. This is key, because your article will “live” forever, and it will be more difficult to correct later. (But if authors or others do find errors in the content or presentation after publication, they should report them to the journal, and there is a correction procedure that it should and will use.)

Tips:

If the journal requires that a cover letter be sent with the article being submitted, be sure to pay attention to what it does and does not want you to include—usually, it's not just a summary of the article but also something about why it should be in that particular journal and why it is useful. Some journals have templates for the cover letter, be sure to check for one. The English of the cover letter should be polished just as carefully as the English of the article itself, and all terms, titles, and other things should match the language of the article.   

After the article is published, be sure to check that it is shown in Scopus (and Web of Science if applicable). It should appear there within a month or so—but the information must be submitted by the journal and sometimes they delay or even forget (because there are so many places where data must be submitted)! If you don’t see it, be sure to check with the journal. Also, check the accuracy of your profile information on Scopus (and WoS if applicable) and the spelling of your name and all other words (it’s a big database and typos can happen).

Also, you can of course include the information on the article accurately on all your academic profiles, and do everything you can to promote your article, which will increase the chances of being cited and if it is, improving your h index. (See the Ministry of Education’s document, page 11, about promoting your article—and don’t forget our TSU website, if the PR department finds it worthwhile to do an article about it.) Be sure to check Scopus, WoS, and Google Scholar from time to time on whether it is being cited by anyone (especially when enough time has gone by that someone would have been able to publish after using it)—and if so, whether you consider what was said about it is an accurate and fair representation of your work. You can and should contact the journal about any possible problems with the use of your article. Meantime, you might receive contacts about your work from interested people, and they should be replied to promptly—that’s a good thing!