Editorial: How to Write More Effective, User-Friendly Reviews for the Journal of Pediatric Psychology

Abstract

A previous editorial provided guidelines for reviewers for the Journal of Pediatric Psychology (JPP), including recommendations concerning content and organization of the review (Drotar, 2009a). Feedback from our associate editors who manage JPP manuscripts and from authors has underscored the need to provide additional guidance to reviewers to enhance the efficiency and user-friendliness of their reviews for our authors and editors. The primary impetus for this editorial is that some authors and managing editors of manuscripts submitted to JPP have been concerned about the length and focus of reviews and the burden on authors that results. Lengthy, unfocused reviews can also place a significant burden on reviewers. We recognize that the length of reviews can reflect the care, conscientiousness, and high standards of our reviewers. It should be noted that we have received many positive comments about the quality of the reviews for JPP and very much appreciate our reviewers’ efforts. We do not want our reviewers to compromise their standards because this would neither facilitate science nor be a true service to authors. On the other hand, we believe that there is a need for reviews to be more focused, efficient, and less burdensome on authors. We believe this can be done without sacrificing quality and high standards for reviews. To address this need, this editorial provides suggestions to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of reviews and reduce the collective burden on authors, managing editors, and reviewers.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.