After extensive searching on the Internet, I failed to find a venue for Hispanists to share with colleagues their myriad of experiences with publishing, particularly the handling of the review and publication processes by refereed journals. My motive is not to encourage irrational venting sessions for rejected authors, but to prompt an intelligent and useful exchange that might assist scholars with choosing prospective journals that exemplify professionalim and integrity; journals that conduct the entire review process expeditiously and provide authors with useful feedback for improving their manuscripts. Many true horror stories have been shared at academic conferences and within language and literature departments across the country, and these should indeed be shared here to help each other avoid potential pitfalls. Besides assisting our fellow scholars, if this blog also succeeds at ultimately improving the management of certain refereed journals, then many in the profession will benefit.
Yes, first round of readers finished their task about 10 weeks after submission. In my case, a split decision meant one more reader, and an ultimate rejection about 6 weeks after that.
Unfortunately one of the PMLA readers cast aspersions on my research and sank it. Didn't get to defend my credibility and was disappointed that PMLA didn't ask any questions, either. The article has found a happy home elsewhere, no aspersions needed.
I had a similar experience to 'Anonymous March 18," but the first round and the final rejection -- after the split -- took a lot longer, perhaps 9-10 months. Nevertheless, the managing editor was always prompt in responding to all my questions. All in all, I think the process was very fair and I would submit there again.
anybody have experience with the rejection timeline of this journal?
ReplyDeleteYes, first round of readers finished their task about 10 weeks after submission. In my case, a split decision meant one more reader, and an ultimate rejection about 6 weeks after that.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately one of the PMLA readers cast aspersions on my research and sank it. Didn't get to defend my credibility and was disappointed that PMLA didn't ask any questions, either. The article has found a happy home elsewhere, no aspersions needed.
I had a similar experience to 'Anonymous March 18," but the first round and the final rejection -- after the split -- took a lot longer, perhaps 9-10 months. Nevertheless, the managing editor was always prompt in responding to all my questions. All in all, I think the process was very fair and I would submit there again.
ReplyDelete