The practice of peer review is to ensure that good social science is published. It is a process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out on all reputable journals. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of Social Science & Medicine and manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
Special Issues have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors and/or Advisory Editors. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office.
Initial manuscript evaluation
The Managing Editor screens all new submissions before deciding if they should be assigned to a Senior Editor for consideration. The Senior Editor is responsible for the decision to reject or recommend the manuscript for publication. This decision will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees.
Those rejected at this stage generally lie outside the aims and scope of the journal. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will normally be informed within 1 week of receipt. Manuscripts that have been recommended for publication are passed to the Editor-in-Chief who is responsible for making the final decision on whether a manuscript is accepted for publication.
Senior Editor evaluation
When assigned a new submission, the Senior Editor will decide if it warrants peer review or if it should be rejected without review. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious conceptual and/or methodological flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will normally be informed within 2 weeks of receipt. Feedback is provided by the Senior Editor or Managing Editor for all manuscripts rejected without review and, where possible, suggestions are made on other suitable publication outlets. Those manuscripts deemed suitable for peer review are passed to at least 2 expert referees for review.
Type of peer review Social Science & Medicine employs double-blind review, where both the referee and the author remain anonymous throughout the process.
How the referees are selected
Referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise, and our referee database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for referees from authors, though these recommendations may or may not be used.
Referee reports
Referees are asked to evaluate a manuscript for:
- originality and significance of contribution
- interest to social scientists and/or practitioners
- international relevance
- coverage of appropriate existing literature
- adequacy of methodology, analysis and interpretation
- clear, concise and jargon-free writing style
- organisation
Referees are asked to provide anonymous comments to the author and are also given the option of providing confidential comments to the editor. The comments to the author are also made available to other reviewers of the manuscript.
Referees are not expected to correct or copy edit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.
How long does the review process take?
Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 2 to 3 months. Should the referees' reports contradict one another or a report is unduly delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. If necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the initial referees. Referees and Senior Editors may request more than one revision of a manuscript, and alternative referees may also be invited to review the manuscript at any time.
The final decision
The Senior Editor is responsible for the decision to reject or recommend the manuscript for publication. This decision will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees.
Manuscripts that have been recommended for publication are passed to the Editor-in-Chief who is responsible for making the final decision on whether a manuscript is accepted for publication. Please note we may forward accepted papers for legal review if appropriate
It currently takes under 8 weeks from acceptance to get a citable copy of an article in press and online, a further 5 weeks until it is compiled into a volume and issue online, and 3 more weeks until the print copy is released.
Becoming a referee for Social Science & Medicine
If you are not currently a referee for Social Science & Medicine but would like to be added to our referee database, please contact the editorial office. The benefits of refereeing for Social Science & Medicine include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in an annual statement in the journal. You may also be able to cite your work for Social Science & Medicine as part of your professional development requirements for various professional societies and organisations.
Home | Elsevier Sites | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Feedback | Site Map | A Reed Elsevier Company