Choosing a journal and getting your manuscript submitted

You’ve done the hard part. The research is complete and the findings are worth sharing. Now you have to get the work into the right journal, and that is more complicated than it looks. It isn’t only about impact factors or prestige. It’s about matching your paper to a journal’s readers, and then giving the editor no easy reason to say no.

This guide covers both halves: choosing the journal, and preparing the manuscript and submission.

Part 1: Choosing the journal

Choose by scope and audience, not prestige

Early-career researchers often aim for the highest-impact journal they can think of. A journal’s prestige means little if its scope doesn’t match your work. If your research is specialised, a specialised journal read by the people who care about that topic will usually serve you better than a famous general one.

Read the journal’s “Aims and Scope” page, then read several recent papers. The scope statement tells you what the journal says it publishes; recent papers tell you what it actually publishes.

Learn the hierarchy in your own field

Every field has an unwritten ranking of journals. Some journals without the highest impact factors are highly respected within a subfield, and a paper there is read by exactly the right people. Ask your supervisor, mentors or colleagues which journals carry weight in your area.

Read the journal before you write for it

Before you submit, read three to five recent articles from your target journal. Notice how long they are, how the introduction is built, how much methodological detail they give, and what kind of conclusion they draw. Reviewers judge your paper partly against what the journal normally publishes.

It also helps to know that peer review is not perfectly neutral. In one large experiment, more than 3,300 reviewers were invited to review the same finance paper, co-written by a Nobel laureate and an early-career researcher. When only the laureate’s name was shown, 23% of reviewers recommended rejection. When the paper was anonymised, 48% did. When only the early-career author’s name was shown, 65% did (Huber et al., 2022). That was one field and one paper, but the lesson is general: if you are early in your career, your paper has to be clear enough to stand on its own.

Watch for calls for papers, carefully

Special issues are themed editions on a single topic. A call for papers that matches your research can be a good fit, because the editors are actively looking for work like yours. But check the journal itself as carefully as you would any other. Some publishers run very large numbers of special issues, and the label alone tells you nothing about quality.

Engage with the journal’s conversation, honestly

If the journal has published papers that are genuinely relevant to your argument, read them and cite them. That shows the editor your work belongs in the conversation their journal is having.

Don’t add citations just to please the editor. Requiring authors to cite a journal’s own papers regardless of relevance is coercive citation, which the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) treats as citation manipulation. If a journal asks you to add citations that don’t support your argument, you can decline politely in your response letter and explain why.

Check how long it will take

Some journals take many months to reach a first decision; others are much quicker. If you have a deadline, such as a thesis submission or a funding report, check before you submit. Many journals publish their average time to first decision on their website. SciRev collects review times reported by authors, journal by journal.

Check the journal is real

Predatory journals take a fee and publish almost anything, with little or no peer review. A paper there can follow you for the rest of your career. Before you submit anywhere unfamiliar, work through the Think. Check. Submit. checklist: is the publisher clearly identified and contactable, does the journal explain its peer review, are its fees stated openly, and is it indexed where your field searches? A journal that promises acceptance or very fast review is a warning sign.

Ask before you submit

A pre-submission enquiry is a short email to the editor asking whether your paper fits the journal. Include your title, abstract and a sentence on why you think it fits. It costs you ten minutes, and it can save months of waiting for a rejection.

Part 2: Preparing the manuscript

Choose the journal before you write the paper

Many researchers write the paper first and then look for somewhere to send it. Different journals expect different things, and a manuscript that hasn’t been shaped for its journal is easy to reject. Decide on the journal early, and write to its word limit, structure and style from the start.

Write an abstract that says what you found

Most editors and reviewers read the abstract first. If it is vague, the rest of the paper may not get a fair reading.

Instead of “This study investigates X and Y”, say what you found: “This study shows that X reduces Y in [population], which challenges [assumption].” Write the abstract last, once you know exactly what the paper says, and rewrite it until a reader outside your subfield could explain your main finding.

Make the introduction an argument, not a literature dump

The introduction should place your study in the current conversation and say clearly what problem you are addressing and why it matters now. Leave out background the reader doesn’t need. Every paragraph should move towards your research question.

Frame the research around a problem

Papers that address a clear problem or gap are easier for reviewers to value. Compare “This paper analyses X policy” with “This paper evaluates whether X policy reduced environmental damage, and offers a framework policymakers can use.” The second tells the reader why to keep going.

State your contribution plainly, in the introduction and again in the conclusion. Don’t assume the reader will work it out.

Give the methods in enough detail to repeat

Reviewers need to trust that your study was done properly, and another researcher should be able to repeat it from your description. “We conducted a survey” tells them nothing. For example: “We used a 20-item Likert-scale questionnaire, sent to a random sample of 500 respondents, and received 300 usable responses.” Then say how the sample was drawn and how the data were analysed. If a reporting guideline applies to your design, such as STROBE for observational studies, use it as a checklist.

Make every figure and table stand alone

Figures and tables are often read before the text. Keep them simple, label them fully, and write captions that let a reader understand the main point without looking anything up in the text.

Polish before you submit

Leave time between finishing and submitting. Read for clarity, coherence and flow, not just grammar:

• use subheadings to break up long sections;
• cut repetition, especially between the discussion and the conclusion;
• replace jargon with plain words wherever the meaning survives;
• check that your references are complete and in the journal’s style.

Get one honest reader first

It is tempting to submit as soon as the paper is finished. Don’t. A colleague reading it fresh will notice the jargon you no longer see, or that your introduction takes three paragraphs to reach the point. Ask at least one person to read the whole manuscript, and give yourself time to act on what they say.

Write for readers everywhere

Your paper will be read by people for whom English is a second or third language, and by people outside your country. Define local terms, avoid idioms, and give context a foreign reader would need, such as what a “local government area” is in Nigeria.

Part 3: The submission package

Follow the author guidelines exactly

If the journal sets a 6,000-word limit, don’t send 6,500. Check the reference style, figure formats, file types, title page requirements and declarations (funding, conflicts of interest, ethics approval, data availability). Small departures from the guidelines can get a paper returned before anyone reads it.

Write a cover letter for this journal

A cover letter is the editor’s first impression of your submission. Instead of the generic “I am submitting my manuscript for consideration”, say what the paper shows and why it suits this journal: “This manuscript reports [finding], which builds on recent work in [journal] on [topic].” I go into cover letters in more detail in my guide to reviewer feedback, peer review and cover letters.

Common mistakes, in one list

Before you press submit, check you haven’t:

• sent the paper to a journal whose scope it doesn’t fit;
• skipped a careful read of the journal’s recent papers;
• written an abstract that describes the topic instead of the finding;
• left your contribution for the reader to infer;
• padded the reference list with citations that don’t support the argument;
• ignored the journal’s timeline when you have a deadline;
• submitted without anyone else reading it.

In short

Publishing isn’t only about good research. It takes strategy, patience and an understanding of the unspoken rules: choose the journal for its readers, shape the paper for that journal, and give the editor a submission that is complete, clear and easy to send out for review.

Reference

Huber, J., Inoua, S., Kerschbamer, R., König-Kersting, C., Palan, S., & Smith, V. L. (2022). Nobel and novice: Author prominence affects peer review. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(41), e2205779119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2205779119