Submissions to the Astrophysical Journal - What experience do you have

  • Thread starter Thread starter Strangerone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experience Journal
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the experiences of participants regarding the submission process to the Astrophysical Journal (ApJ), focusing on the timeline and expectations for receiving feedback after submitting a manuscript. It includes insights into the peer review process and personal anecdotes related to publication experiences.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant, Strangerone, inquires about the typical duration from submission to receiving feedback from the ApJ editorial board, noting that their submission has been in progress for 1.5 months.
  • Another participant outlines the general peer review process, highlighting potential delays due to reviewer availability and the volunteer nature of the review system.
  • A participant with experience publishing in ApJ shares that the initial assignment to a senior editor typically occurs within a few days, and suggests that 1.5 months is on the longer side for receiving the first review.
  • There is a suggestion that if no feedback is received after two months, it may be appropriate to contact the journal's editor for an update.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying experiences and expectations regarding the timeline for feedback from ApJ, indicating that there is no consensus on the typical duration, with some suggesting it may take longer than others expect.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention factors that could influence the review timeline, such as the niche nature of the research and the responsiveness of reviewers, but do not resolve these uncertainties.

Strangerone
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I sent an article to ApJ for a while ago. This article is a summary of the results of my research in a relevant subject. It was sent 1,5 months ago. The answer from the editorial board so far is that it is in progress. How long does it usually tend to go from it is submitted until we get a response concerning the assessment of the article? Do you have any experience with this?

Have a nice weekend ! :-)

Best regards
Strangerone
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I can't speak for the Astrophysical Journal specifically.

In general, the peer review process goes as follows.
- receipt of the manuscript by the journal
- journal assigns an associate editor
- associate editor identifies and contacts mulitple reviewers
- reviewers review the article and give their response to the associate editor
- associate editor reviews the reports makes a decision
- authors are contacted

Sometimes this process can take a while, since some reviewers don't respond immediately. Sometimes the manuscript has to be sent to multiple potential reviewers before anyone even agrees to look at it (it can be especially time consuming if the material in the manuscript targets a small "niche" area of research). Then reviewers are supposed to return their reports within a couple of weeks. This doesn't always happen - even if they agree to the deadline. In these situations, the associate editor has to "hound" the reviewers. The review process is on a volunteer basis too, so there are essentially no reprecussions for a late review (other than a delay in publication of presumably relevant material).

I've had manuscripts that have taken 6 months to get reviewed - and with minimal revisions required. (Again, not with ApJ.)

In general, I think after 2 months, if you haven't heard anything, a polite correspondence with the journal's editor is appropriate.
 
Thank You for a very good and informative answer. Have a nice evening and weekend.

Best regards
Strangerone
 
I've published in ApJ, and my adviser has edited for them. Within a few days of submission (usually the following Tuesday, I believe) the paper will be assigned to one of the senior editors (you should have received an email with your editors name). This is, of course, if it was not rejected outright. After that, your editor will ask someone in the field if they would be wiling to review it. It might take a few days to a week to find someone to review it, and then they usually give them several weeks to read it before sending a reminder. All in all, 1.5 months is about the max of how long it should take to get your first review. If I were you, I'd send a polite email to your editor asking for an update on the status of your paper. That will prompt them to try to get an answer from the reviewer, which might take another week (because, speaking as someone who has reviewed a few papers, that's usually when you actually start reading it).
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
16K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 169 ·
6
Replies
169
Views
30K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
3K