Interpreting the review process in applied linguistics research

Peer review has been the subject of a number of academic publications, typically focusing on the reviewer’s perspective with the aim of promoting more helpful evaluations. By contrast, the present chapter takes an alternative view in defining the feedback literacy of authors who submit a manuscript to a journal. Basing the study on our involvement in a top-level journal in applied linguistics, we examine the submissions and the procedures, noting common problems along the way. We then draw on a 500,000-word corpus of reviews to select exemplars, adopting a case-study approach first of unsuccessful and then of successful submissions for more detailed examination. These exemplify both the cyclical process of reviewing and revising a manuscript and the conversations that take place between authors and reviewers. The aim of this chapter is twofold: to provide advice for all stages of the reviewing process and to contribute to the growing literature on feedback literacy by promoting reflective practices of those stakeholders involved in the process of submission and publication