This month's column, written by Rebecca Hains, features an interview with Norma Pecora on the academic publishing process. Norma Pecora is a professor in the School of Telecommunications at Ohio University. She is a former editor of the journal Popular Communication, which she cofounded and coedited with Sharon Mazzarella of Clemson University.

The academic publishing process can be mystifying to those who are new to it. I recently interviewed Norma Pecora and asked her to demystify the journal submission process for our readers.

RH: As a former editor of Popular Communication, I'm sure you have many insights to share about the publishing process. In your opinion, what do graduate students who are new to publishing in academic journals need to know?

NP: The first thing they need is to learn how to select a journal that's appropriate. They should look at what a particular journal has published in the past and see if it's appropriate for their work. Make sure it's a match.

The second thing is to look at the page in every journal that identifies the criteria for submission of a paper. They need to know what a particular journal requires, because different journals have different requirements. If it says MLA, do it in MLA. If it says APA, do it in APA. If it says to send five copies, send five copies.

Too often, in editing Popular Communication, we had to send pieces back and say, "We only accept APA style, and this isn't." Once the article is submitted, if three months have passed, it's appropriate to contact the journal and find out how long it will take to receive a response. Students sometimes think they should submit their article and just wait, but if they think it's taking too long, it's alright to follow up.

Once you get the reviews back from the journal editor, it may state that your piece has been accepted with some minor revisions, or that it has been accepted with substantial revisions, or that you should revise and resubmit your piece. In any of those cases, let the editor know that you will follow up with his or her request. Don't just let it drop! Very often, we had material sitting in the open file drawer for 2 years, because the author never contacted us or followed up on a resubmit.

Students also need to know that they don't need to make every change their reviewers have requested, if they think some of those changes are inappropriate. If a suggested change isn't true to their work, or if something they wrote seems to have been misinterpreted, then they can attach to their resubmission a cover letter explaining their perspective. Or they can ask for suggestions on ways to clarify the ideas.

If it's a "reject," then it's perfectly appropriate to turn around and submit it to another journal at that point-but if they're smart, they'll respond to the critique. Almost all journals send responses with the reviewer comments.

RH: You recently mentioned to me that you were concerned about an article you had seen, in which another academic organization was discussing the possible elimination of the "blind" part of the blind peer review process. I know you disagree with that idea.

NP: Yes. I think that perhaps students need to know the value of the blind peer review process. While accountability is important, there are real reasons to have blind peer review: You want the quality of your work to stand by itself and not have it reviewed based on some personal or professional disagreement. The notion of it being blind is really important.

RH: We also recently discussed the latest issue of Critical Studies in Media Communication, which contained an editorial expressing concern about the increase in the number of journals in our fields. The editor worried that this might lead to a decrease in the quality of published articles. How should a student who is new to the academic publishing field decide, "Yes, I'll submit to this new journal," or "No, I'll try for an established one?" How should one go about that first step of choosing an appropriate journal?

NP: There are three ways. In my graduate theory class, I have the students go to our library and walk the rows where the journals are and look at the titles. I tell them to see what's interesting to them. So I have students who are in communication and development, and they always find health journals where they could publish their work.

Another way is to look at an article that they're interested in, and see where it was published. Get to know the places that publish the authors whose work they like.

Finally, while it has some limitations, the Iowa Guide (http://iowaguide.uiowa.edu/) can be a good starting point. The information there isn't very deep and is unfortunately sometimes outdated, so they'll still have to go to the journals themselves-but it has some good data.

RH: I've noticed that junior faculty members are often concerned about things like circulation and acceptance rates, and the Iowa Guide has some of this information-but not always, and it's not always clearly accurate. Am I correct in understanding that it's alright to email the editor and ask him or her to confirm that kind of information?

NP: Definitely! Ask the editor.

Also, find somebody who publishes and just ask them to read your work. I mean, that's why we're in this job! We like to teach. Get suggestions from them.

RH: What are your thoughts using conference presentations to inform the publishing process?

NP: Oh, you should absolutely present your research at a conference first. Because then you get feedback, you find out who comes to the panel and is interested, and you can say, "I'm working on this and know it needs more work; can you help me out?" That kind of thing is always acceptable, and it's why I think everything should go to a conference first.

Once you do submit to a conference, make sure you send your paper out to a journal, too. I have a lot of papers sitting around here that I presented at a conference, but then they never saw the light of day. The way to play the game is to retool your article, based on the feedback you receive at the conference and on your experience in presenting it.

RH: Let's return for a moment to the idea of getting feedback from senior scholars you've met at conferences. When I was a graduate student, I always had good luck connecting with senior scholars at conferences. But some of my peers seemed intimidated by the idea of approaching senior scholars at conferences. Do you have any advice on how to do it?

NP: I have to admit, I'm always impressed when someone comes up and says, "I know your book!" That's a good approach. But really, we become faculty because we like mentoring. That's what we do. We're in this because we like to teach, and that's all mentoring is. It's intimidating-but so is applying for grad school.

A good strategy is to attend the person's panel, know their work, and talk with them briefly at the end of a panel session. Or if you see them in the hall, ask if you can contact them at a later time. It's useful to follow up on a meeting like this with an email.

RH: Do you have any additional advice to share?

NP: I think the point about contacting the editor if there are questions is important. In fact, it's a good idea to see who's behind a journal and learn about their interests. Check out the editors. Look at their web sites; find out about their background and expertise. See what they've published. That can help you decide if your work is a good match for their journal.

Then, see who the board members are, as well. If they know a board member, contact them-send them your abstract and title, and ask if they think your piece is a good match for the journal.

For further reading:

Donovan, S.K. (2004). Writing successful cover letters for unsolicited submissions to academic journals: Comment. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 35(4): 221-222.

Gump, S.E. (2004). Writing successful cover letters for unsolicited submissions to academic journals. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 35(2): 92-102.

Steiner, L. (2007). Editorial: Calling a halt to further proliferation of journals. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 24(5): 383-386.

Rebecca Hains is an assistant professor at Salem State College (Salem, Massachusetts) and an alumna of Temple University. Mikaela Marlow is an assistant professor at the University of Idaho and an alumna of the University of California at Santa Barbara. They serve on ICA's board of directors, representing student interests. If you have ideas or suggestions for future columns, please contact Rebecca at rhains@salemstate.edu or Mika at mmarlow@uidaho.edu.