orgstud-review-process

• SKILL.mdcore · 5,949 bytes

# Review Process (orgstud-review-process)

## When to trigger

- You want to calibrate desk-reject odds and timeline before or after submitting
- A decision letter arrived and you need to read what the editor is *actually* signalling
- You are unsure whether an R&R is "major-but-encouraging" or "high-risk reject-with-resubmission"
- You are deciding whether to revise for OS or reposition to a sibling journal

## How OS review works (and how it differs)

OS runs a **double-anonymized**, **developmental** review handled by a co-editor with (typically) 2–3 reviewers drawn from the relevant conversation. The European, theory-first culture shapes what reviewers do: they engage your **theoretical contribution and your use of social theory** as the primary axis — not just method execution. Reviewers here often *co-develop* the theory across rounds, which is why OS R&Rs can be intellectually demanding and multi-round, but also why a serious R&R is a genuine signal of interest. Expect reviewers who know the canonical works in your conversation intimately.

**Desk-screen** is real and theory-driven. The most common desk-rejects are not method failures but **"interesting phenomenon, no theoretical contribution,"** wrong-fit ("belongs at a sibling journal"), or superficial engagement with the literature it claims to advance. A clean dataset will not save a paper with a thin theoretical move.