Storytelling,
Self, Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Storytelling Studies
SSS Journal Guidelines for Reviewers
Introduction
The following are answers to the most frequently asked questions about the Storytelling, Self Society Journal (SSS Journal) peer review process. We offer an overview of the review process with the understanding that a wide variety issues or evaluation standards will come into play due to the types of submissions we receive. We hope this information proves useful to both new and experienced reviewers and contributes to the overall quality of the SSS Journal.
1. What role do peer reviewers play in the SSS Journal editorial decision-making process?
Peer review is central to the process of selecting papers that will be published. As soon as papers come in, they are acknowledged to the author and entered in the manuscript log. One of the SSS Journal Co-Editors (hereafter referred as editor) will read the manuscript, make an initial determination about the paper’s suitability for the journal, and begin the process of contacting appropriate peer reviewers to determine their willingness and availability.
2. What is the sequence of events for assigning reviewers and processing reviews?
Please note the following:
· The author's identity is never revealed to the peer reviewers.
· Peer reviewers should never reveal they are reviewing a particular paper to anyone, nor furnish copies of the manuscript to anyone else.
· The editor considers the peer reviews in making the final editorial decision.
3. How should I separate confidential comments to the editor?
Any confidential comments or information exclusively for the editor should be written only on the SSS Journal Reviewer Checklist and Comments to the Editor form. If you are uncertain about whether an important comment should go to the author, send it to the editor with that notation.
4. What kinds of reviews are most helpful to editorial staff?
Reviews should be specific, concrete, to the point, and detailed. Avoid such generalizations as “needs more references”—specify what kind and where the text needs citations to back it up. If possible, reviewers might give the author a list of useful references and rationale for considering them in revisions. Reviewers should avoid writing “some of the sentences are unclear and awkward”—instead, reviewers should tell the author which sentences are problematic. Reviewers should not write “we need more information about the subjects”—instead, reviewers should tell the author what kind of information (for example, ages, how recruited, educational background). Also, the more specific a reviewer’s suggestions for revisions are, the easier it is for the editors to determine whether those revisions have been made once we receive the revised manuscript. Authors will receive only the “comments to the author” sheet, and therefore all notations a reviewer wishes the author to consider should be included on that sheet.
5. Should I check the article's references?
Some journals ask peer reviewers to check bibliographic references at random. We do not require this, since so many of our reviewers work in practice settings and do not have ready access to reference sources. A reviewer should, however, feel free to comment on references and their format. Useful reviewer comments include noticing, for example: Are claims, points, and facts referenced? Are recent references you are aware of listed? Was a sufficient literature review offered?
6. How many papers can I expect to review each year?
This number varies, depending on the peer reviewer's area of expertise, how many reviewers we have in that area, and the number of submissions on that topic we receive at any given time. When we are preparing for a special issue, for example, reviewers whose expertise is relevant to the special issue's topic may agree to receive more than one manuscript in a concentrated period of time. Conversely, reviewers in unrelated areas may experience a dry spell. Other factors influence how many manuscripts a reviewer receives, such as his or her timeliness in meeting deadlines for past reviews and the thoroughness of those reviews.
7. Should I comment on whether a research article has implications for practitioners?
We encourage authors to discuss how the findings of their study might affect the day-to-day services delivered by educators, specialists, and other practitioners. Some relevant topics, however, may not contain practitioner points, and some excellent authors are not qualified to make such claims.
8. Should I comment on grammar, style, and organization in reviews?
We are dependent on reviewers for feedback on manuscript content. Please focus your attention in this area . Obstacles in writing can obstruct meaning and problems in grammar and style may be factors in the decision whether or not to publish a piece. However, minor changes in such areas as spelling and grammar will be taken care of during the copyediting of an article.
9. Should I comment on length?
SSS Journal guidelines state that the preferred length for an article is up to 9,000 words. Articles should be tautly designed, sharp in style, and free of excess verbiage or jargon. All manuscripts, but particularly those that exceed journal guidelines on length, should be looked at carefully to determine if their length is sustained by their substance.
10. When should I disqualify myself as a reviewer?
· Please look at the work submitted to you for review immediately upon receipt and if you feel for any reason you should disqualify yourself, please notify the editor immediately.
· If you know or think you know the author or if you believe the author's identity is revealed in any way, the reviewer should notify the editor.
· A commitment to read a paper is a commitment to conform to the time limits. When you are uncertain about whether you will be able to meet the deadline, for whatever reasons (travel, teaching, sabbatical, health issues, professional commitments) please let the editor know this, before accepting a manuscript. (If you want to continue reviewing while you are on sabbatical, let us have your temporary address in advance.)
· When you have any involvement with the work the paper covers, you should disqualify yourself as a reviewer; for example, if you are an employee (or were at the time of the study) of the institution involved or were a dissertation advisor on the work in question.
· When you believe you cannot be objective about the topic, the method, the conclusions, or the claims you should disqualify yourself.
· A reviewer can review on a substantive area they are not familiar with for many reasons, for example, familiarity with the methodology, but not the substance.
11. Can I show the manuscript to other people or discuss it before it has been published?
No. You may not show it to others nor use any part of the manuscript in any way.
12. Is SSS Journal interested in both quantitative and qualitative research, and if so, how do I evaluate it?
In general, the editors will not ask a reviewer to evaluate a methodology with which they are unfamiliar or untrained. Quantitative papers must have rigor and validity. Qualitative papers that interpret, describe, and narrate events or illuminate contexts are welcomed. Qualitative research papers should show coherent methodologies and rigorous frameworks for observation and analysis. Advocacy is encouraged, but needs to be balanced and grounded by these disciplinary methods and frameworks. Also, it is equally important in both qualitative and quantitative studies to give a detailed account of sample selection, sample characteristics, observation process, and questioning methods. Qualitative and quantitative studies should be appropriately reflexive in explicating and interrogating their analytic methods in detail: since applications of any disciplinary methodology to contemporary storytelling may be innovative, the authors should take pains to demonstrate relevance and significance. Ask the questions: Does the piece have the potential to provoke thought within the field, advance scholarship, add new knowledge, and inform practitioners?
13. Should I assume that the manuscript I review is written for American audiences?
No. The SSS Journal is an international journal. We want to make sure that the author(s) is not assuming that the audience is American (or any other nationality) and will understand culture-bound references.
14. Where should I send my reviews?
Send reviews to the SSS Journal editor from whom you received your reviewer packet.
15. What role do I play in the process?