Exploring reviewer reactions to manuscripts submitted to academic journals


Research output: Contribution to journalArticlespeer-review

30 Citations (Scopus)


This paper extends a previous study (Coniam, 2011) into a corpus of manuscript (MS) reviews conducted for the journal System by one reviewer in the eight-year period 2003e2011. The current paper highlights additional facets of the review process that focus on issues involving authors themselves. The study examines two related sets of research questions. The first set concerns the relationship between verdict (whether the MS is accepted or rejected) with the geographical area in which the study is situated and with the ‘International English’ quality of submissions. The second set explores the distribution of comments across the different categories of analysis together with the ratio of negative to positive comments produced by the reviewer. The paper closes with the reassurance to authors that reviews appear to be written individually and with respect for the MS in hand, rather than external criteria or biasese at least from the perspective of the current reviewer. Authors contemplating article submission may wish to consider the extent to which the number of negative comments in a particular category reflects aspects of their own writing in that area. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)544-553
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2012


Coniam, D. (2012). Exploring reviewer reactions to manuscripts submitted to academic journals. System, 40(4), 544-553. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2012.10.002


  • Manuscript reviews
  • Academic journal
  • System
  • Small corpus
  • Alt. title: One reviewer’s view of the review process


Dive into the research topics of 'Exploring reviewer reactions to manuscripts submitted to academic journals'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.