It All Matters
Reviewer Considerations in Evaluating Manuscripts
Some journals have detailed guidelines for their providing their reviewers with checklists or forms for each manuscript. Others provide nothing at all, leaving it up to the individual reviewer to comment on whatever he or she feels moved to address.
In a study of peer reviewers, the Journal of Rehabilitation2 reports that 71 percent of respondents received no formal training as reviewers, learning only “on the job” – and a volunteer job, at that. As a result, authors can expect a range of subjective as well as objective responses to their submissions.
In both formal studies and anecdotal interviews, peer reviewers have agreed on the factors that help a manuscript remain in the “further consideration” pile. These are things you can control, so manage them wisely:
- Clear, cogent writing style.
Reviewers look for manuscripts that state their point clearly and well. - Original research.
The Journal of Rehabilitation study reports that 33 percent of respondents give positive weighting to new ideas in the field.3 - Appropriate length.
Articles that are too long or too short may be dismissed, even if the topic is interesting.4 - Attention to detail.
Everything from research design to final proofreading needs your close attention.

