|
Post by trying to write on May 8, 2012 13:52:48 GMT -5
Does anyone have feedback they can share about submitting research to Social Problems? In particular, I'm interested in turn-around time, but other feedback you can offer (acceptance rate, R&R rejection rate, etc.) or just about your experience would be great too.
|
|
|
Post by on sp on May 8, 2012 15:34:49 GMT -5
I believe that the info on acceptance rate and the like, submission totals, maybe even average turn-around time is somewhere on the SSSP's website. So you might poke around there for that info. (I think the editor puts out an annual update or statement or something on these issues...)
I had a very positive experience with Social Problems under its previous editor. Reviews on my manuscript (which was a qualitative study) were thorough, focused, relevant, and fair in my opinion, and the editor did a good job mediating the relationship between me and the reviewers, directing my attention to particular aspects of reviewers' comments that he found especially important. The turn-around time was somewhere around 5 months for the first review, which went out to four reviewers (decision: r&r), 3 months for the second review, which went out to two reviewers (again, r&r), then about a month or two for the next review, out to one reviewer (conditional acceptance). Things went quite fast after that. Obviously, I can't give a sense of how the current editor operates, but I can say that I would certainly submit again to the journal.
Best of luck!
|
|
anon
New Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by anon on May 8, 2012 15:45:21 GMT -5
My experience was also with the previous editor, but was very positive. From initial submission I received 3 thoughtful and thorough reviews in about 3.5 months for an R&R. The reviews conflicted each other a bit, and Chiricos did a fair job of giving a sense of what was most importance. After the paper went back in, it took 1 month for conditional acceptance. I've heard good things about Pettit's editorship and I'd would absolutely submit again.
|
|
|
Post by flipside on May 9, 2012 10:25:36 GMT -5
fwiw, negative experiences are less likely to be posted than positive ones. I had a neither good nor heinous (I've had worse rejection experiences) experience, but I do not feel comfortable sharing anything further in such a public forum, even anonymously.
|
|
|
Post by stats on May 9, 2012 14:43:42 GMT -5
The stats from last year (June 1 2010 to May 31 2011) indicate that original submissions were deflected 58% of the time, rejected 26% of the time, and given an R&R 16% of the time. Chances are good if you get an R&R (probably due to the high deflect rate), as resubmissions were accepted 31% of the time, given an another R&R 55% of the time, and rejected only 13% of the time. Note that this is not necessary 1st time R&Rs though.
|
|
|
Post by Deflection on May 9, 2012 17:08:30 GMT -5
Hmm. By 'deflection' do you mean that they do not send the manuscript to reviewers and instead reject it outright?
|
|
|
Post by fwiw on May 10, 2012 7:21:09 GMT -5
I agree with flipside to a degree. People who get hurtful rejections might be less inclined to post about it, but if someone had over a year long negotiation, or 8 months for a first round rejection (which happened to me with Journal of Family Issues), or things like that, it's good to post about it, so others know it may not be the most "efficient" submission option.
|
|
|
Post by stats on May 10, 2012 8:29:09 GMT -5
Hmm. By 'deflection' do you mean that they do not send the manuscript to reviewers and instead reject it outright? Yes. My understanding is that all manuscripts get an editorial once-over before going out for review. 58% of original submissions are not sent out for review but the mean turnaround time for those deflections is 9.8 days.
|
|
|
Post by qstoo on Jun 14, 2012 14:45:46 GMT -5
I submitted an article to SP a little while back -- not sure it's the same editor. My co-author and I waited a while for a response, maybe 4 months or so, and then got six (!!!) reviews from sociologists and others who were probably psych people. Our article was rejected, but even with an r&R, six reviews would have been a lot to take into account.
|
|
|
Post by youdecide on Jul 4, 2012 8:17:16 GMT -5
6 months for a reject. 3 reviewers. 1 reviewer had "major concerns" that made it very obvious they couldn't read. Something along the lines of "you should be worried about not controlling for X and it limits the value of this manuscript" when we (A) went out of our way to implement a rigorous methodology that takes care of "X" and (B) mentioned this in the intro, methods, and discussion section.
Listen, seriously. If you're confused about what's going on in a manuscript, that's not an automatic reject. Maybe the author can be more clear, maybe the author is straight-up wrong, but more likely you need to re-read the manuscript and/or tell the editor you don't have the expertise to review it.
How did Einstein find peer-reviewers?
|
|
|
Post by ive decided on Jul 4, 2012 8:49:15 GMT -5
Listen, seriously. When did you start thinking your were Einstein?
|
|
|
Post by Meh on Jul 6, 2012 15:23:29 GMT -5
I submitted to SP under this editorship last year.
6 months for a rejection. 3 reviews: 1 very positive with suggestions; 1 slightly positive with questions; 1 peculiar negative methodological review (that the editor must have agreed with).
I was a bit surprised with the rejection. Perhaps one of the reviewers was more critical than their written review suggested. The editor's letter was very vague but kind.
|
|
|
Post by socprobq on Jul 26, 2012 9:35:45 GMT -5
So does each submission have a online status of "Internal Review"...then "Awaiting Editor's Decision"...and then is finally sent out for review?
|
|
|
Post by socprob on Jul 26, 2012 10:33:50 GMT -5
So does each submission have a online status of "Internal Review"...then "Awaiting Editor's Decision"...and then is finally sent out for review? Yes, that was my experience. But as a poster noted above, only 40% of manuscripts sent to SP are ever sent out for review. Nearly 60% are rejected by the editor at this stage.
|
|
|
Post by RR on Jul 26, 2012 15:45:19 GMT -5
I got an R&R from them about a month ago, and my experience was that it said "internal review" for a couple of weeks, then "external review" for a few months, then "awaiting editorial decision" for a week or so before I got my decision letter. Total wait time was around 4.5 months.
|
|