Understanding the publication process: Your paper’s journey explained in seven steps
Understanding the publication process: Your paper’s journey explained in seven steps
Author Resources > Editing your research article > Understanding the publication process
The journey to publication can feel uncertain when you do not know where your manuscript stands in the peer review process. Gain clarity on the standard journal workflow so you can see what happens to your paper after submission.
Your paper's journey explained in seven steps
- Internal checks on new submissions
- Peer review
- Review decision
- Revised submission received
- Subsequent peer review
- Preliminary acceptance
- Formal acceptance and publication
What does the publication process look like?
When a journal first receives your submission, there are typically two separate checks to confirm that the paper is appropriate and ready for peer review:
Stage 1: Internal checks on new submissions
Technical check
Performed by a technical editor to ensure that the submission has been properly completed and is ready for further assessment. Blurry figures, missing ethical statements, and incomplete author affiliations are common issues that are addressed at this initial stage. Typically, there are three technical checks: upon initial submission, alongside the first decision letter, and upon acceptance.
Editorial screening
Once a paper passes the first check, an editor with subject expertise assesses the paper and determines whether it is within the journal’s scope and if it could potentially meet the required publication criteria. While there may be requests for further information and minor edits from the author as needed, the paper will either be desk rejected by the editor or allowed to proceed to peer review.
Both editors at this point will additionally make notes for items to be followed-up on at later stages.
Stage 2: Peer review
Depending on the journal’s editorial structure, the editor who performed the initial assessment may also oversee peer review or another editor with more specific expertise may be assigned. Regardless of the journal’s specific process, the various roles and responsibilities during peer review include:
Editor
Initial evaluation to ensure the paper is ready for review, securing reviewers with relevant expertise and processing a decision on the paper.
Reviewer
Submitting reviewer comments within a reasonable timeframe, typically around two weeks unless an extension is requested.
Journal Staff
Ensuring that the process follows journal guidelines and proceeds on an acceptable schedule; answering questions to provide assistance for editors and reviewers.
Stage 3: Revision decision
Editors evaluate peer reviewer feedback and their own expert assessment on the manuscript to reach a decision. After the editor submits a decision, the journal may review it before formally processing the decision and sending it on to you.
At this stage, a technical editor may scan the manuscript and reviewer comments to ensure that journal standards have been followed. They will also add requests to ensure the paper, if published, will adhere to journal requirements for data sharing, copyright, and ethical reporting.
Stage 4: Revised submission received
Upon receiving your revised submission, a technical editor will assess the revisions to confirm the requests from the journal have been properly addressed. Before the paper is returned to the editor for consideration, the journal needs to be confident that the paper will not have any issues related to the metadata and reporting standards that could prevent publication. The editor may contact you to resolve any serious issues.
Stage 5: Subsequent peer review
When your resubmitted paper has passed the required checks, it will be reassigned to the same editor who handled your initial submission. At this stage, the editor is checking if all reviewer comments have been addressed and if the paper now adheres to the journals publication criteria. Depending on the situation, some editors may feel confident making this decision based on their own expertise while others may re-invite the previous reviewers for their opinions. It is generally expected that these stages of peer review will move more quickly than the initial stages unless new concerns have been introduced during revision.
Stage 6: Preliminary acceptance
At this stage, your editor is satisfied with the scientific quality of your work and has chosen to accept it in principle. Before it can proceed to production and typesetting, the journal office will perform its third and final technical check, requesting any formatting changes or additional details that may be required.
Stage 7: Formal acceptance and publication
After a technical editor has confirmed that all requests from the provisional acceptance letter have been addressed, you will receive your formal acceptance letter. This letter indicates that your paper is being passed from the Editorial department to the production department—that all information has been editorially approved. The scientific content has been approved through peer review, and the journal’s publication requirements have been met.
Final thoughts
It can be unclear where your paper is in the publication process. Reference this guide to better understand the stages that go into evaluating and publishing your study, and get clarity on what is happening with your paper throughout editorial evaluation.
Note that the descriptions are based on the process at PLOS journals. As such, please keep in mind that at other journals, various role titles (e.g. technical editor) and their editorial responsibilities may differ from what is outlined above.
Next: Navigating the publication process
How to pass journal ethics checks - and author checklist
How to respond to peer review feedback - step by step guide
How to write a data management plan
