The Process of Editorial Review.

Abstract The article reports on the process of editorial review. It is the object of this article to describe and explain the reviewing process and to comment on the points of particular sensitivity. Except when associate editors are involved, the entire review process is conducted anonymously. Many reviewers prefer not to know the author's identity, and authors sometimes believe that factors attendant to their identity may serve to prejudice the reviewers. Apart from the design of the process itself, much of which is inherited from one's predecessors, the two most critical decisions are the choice of the reviewers and the editorial decision to be made on the basis of the reviewers' analyses and recommendations. Reviewers serve in an advisory capacity to the editor. It is important to emphasize that it is the editor who decides on a manuscript. It is to be hoped that the editor will be guided in the great majority of instances by advice furnished by the reviewers. But the responsibility for making sound editorial decisions is necessarily his, and it must be understood that he may disagree with their counsel. In such circumstances, he may seek advice from still other reviewers until he believes that a particular course of action deserves his support.