2001 Annual Report of the International Studies Quarterly Editors

 

This is the second complete editorial report for the Iowa State editorial team. All information, unless otherwise noted, pertains to the 2001 calendar year. The first section deals with the structure and process of ISQ’s administration.

 

1.      Staff and Administrative Structure of the Iowa State Team

 

The ISU staff consists of seven individuals. Peter Dombrowski, Patrick James, Richard W. Mansbach, and James M. McCormick are editors. Kirsten L. Rafferty is the chief editorial assistant, and at the time of this report Zhenya Hu and Kim Saak are graduate editorial assistants.

 

Each editor is assigned several primary and secondary “areas of expertise,” analogous to ISA’s sections. Because at least two editors have some responsibility within each area, we eliminate the possibility that a large influx of submissions in any one area will cause a bottleneck that slows down the editorial process. The primary areas of expertise are divided in the following manner:

 

Peter Dombrowski: Comparative and Interdisciplinary Studies, Environmental Studies, International Political Economy, International Law and Human Rights, Comparative Politics

Patrick James: Methodology and the Scientific Study of International Processes, Rational Choice and Formal Modeling

Richard W. Mansbach: International Organization, International Politics Theory, Identity Politics, Feminist Theory and Gender Studies

James M. McCormick: International Security and Peace Studies, Foreign Policy Analysis

The Iowa State team also has a chief editorial assistant who oversees the daily operations of the journal and supervises the graduate student staff. This individual serves as the liaison between the editors, authors, reviewers, and Blackwell publishers.

 

2.      Submissions

 

During 2001, 180 manuscripts were submitted. This is in comparison to 167 in 2000, 143 in 1999, and 155 in 1997. (1998 is not reported because of the transition.) Of this year’s submissions, 60 were resubmissions (47 manuscripts for a first revision and 13 for a second revision). As the attached graph (“First Time Submissions 2001”) indicates, submissions are clearly most common in the subfields of international politics theory (33), followed by foreign policy analysis (16), international political economy (16), and rational choice and formal modeling (15). Submissions have been significantly lower in the subfields of international law and human rights (4), comparative interdisciplinary studies (2), identity politics (2), and feminist theory and gender studies (0). We acknowledge that some categories appear skewed. This is largely attributable to the overlap between substance and method in our classification scheme and to the fact that some submissions do not fit neatly into a single subfield. Submissions significantly declined in the subfield of international political economy (from 39 in 2000 to 16 in 2001), but this is largely a result of improvements in categorizing incoming submissions. We will continue to monitor sections in which submissions have been scarce (i.e., less than five per year) and we will try to encourage submissions within these categories by writing to the respective section heads.

 

Of the 133 first-time submissions, 24% of our first-named authors are affiliated with institutions outside of the United States (compared to 19% in 2000). Approximately 14% of first-named submitting authors were female (a decrease from 20% in 2000 and 18.5% in 1999).

 

Submissions by Gender:

 

First-Named Authors

Co-authors

 

%(#)

%(#)

Female

14.4% (26)

18% (11)

Male

85.6% (154)

82% (50)

 

 

3.      Acceptance Rates

 

Based on 143 decisions in this calendar year, our acceptance rate is approximately 14%. This compares to 14.9% in 2000, 11.7% in 1999, and 12.8% in 1997.

 

Decision

Number

Percent

Accept

20

14

Reject

66

46.1

Revise and Resubmit

57

39.9

Did Not Review

0

0

Withdrawn

0

0

Total

143

100

 

 

 

2001 Decisions by Gender (First-Named Authors):

 

 

Accept

Reject

Revise and Resubmit

Total

2001

Female

15%(3)

19.3%(10)

19.3% (11)

16.8%(24)

Male

85%(17)

80.7%(56)

80.7% (46)

83.2%(119)

2000

Female

21.7% (5)

20.3% (16)

20.8% (10)

20.7% (31)

Male

78.3% (18)

79.7% (63)

79.2% (38)

79.3% (119)

 

 

These acceptances have been distributed across the following subfields:

 

Subfield

2001

2000

 

% (#)

% (#)

Comparative Interdisciplinary Studies

5% (1)

0% (0)

Comparative Politics

5% (1)

4.3% (1)

Environmental Studies

5% (1)

0% (0)

Feminist Theory and Gender Studies

0% (0)

13% (3)

Foreign Policy Analysis

5% (1)

13% (3)

Identity Politics

5% (1)

8.7% (2)

International Political Economy

30% (6)

8.7% (2)

International Politics Theory

5% (1)

4.3% (1)

International Security and Peace Studies

10% (2)

13% (3)

Methodology and the Scientific Study of International Processes

15% (3)

26.1% (6)

Rational Choice and Formal Modeling

15% (3)

8.7% (2)

Total

100%

99.8%

 

We are trying to diversify what we publish in ISQ, and our distribution indicates that we are meeting this goal. As noted above, we will actively encourage submissions from underrepresented subfields.

 

We are pleased to report that at this time, we do not have a backlog of acceptances. This means that once an article is accepted, there is a good prospect that it will be published within six months or so.

 

Our revise and resubmit rate for 2001 was 39.9% (compared to 31.2% in 2000). It is our policy to be frugal in the number of invitations to revise and resubmit manuscripts, limiting them to instances in which reviews clearly indicate that a revised version is likely to be publishable. Under those circumstances in which revisions are so substantial that they require the manuscript be fundamentally reconceptualized or entirely redesigned, we are more likely to reject the paper. This gives authors a chance to turn more quickly elsewhere, rather than waiting a long time for a process that in all likelihood will result in rejection. At the same time, revised papers are not certain to be published, although the rate of acceptance among resubmissions is relatively high.

 

 

 

4.      Reviewer Profile

 

We continue to compile a large and diverse database of potential reviewers. As of the end of 2001, 18.4% of our reviews have come from individuals affiliated with institutions outside the United States (compared to 19.1% in 2000). 4% of those who reviewed for us were affiliated with Canadian institutions and 14.3% of our reviews have come from individuals outside of North America (including Mexico [compared to 15.2% in 2000 and 11.7% in 1999]). The United Kingdom has continued to be the source of most of our non-U.S. reviewers (21 reviews, or 4.7% of all reviews). We also have received reviews from Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey. We intend to maintain the diversity of our reviewer pool.

 

Reviewers by Gender (Approximate):

 

 

2001

% (#)

2000

% (#)

Female

15.9% (70)

14.9 (52)

Male

84.1% (371)

85.1 (297)

 

 

5.      Review Turn-Around-Time

 

Submission activity has been fairly consistent throughout the year, averaging 13.9 submissions per month. Submissions were highest in October (21) and August (20) and lowest in December (9) and September (8).

 

Turn-Around

Days

Months

Average

146.3

4.9

Median

140

4.7

Standard Deviation

73.2

2.44

 

 

 

Maximum

450

15

Minimum

6

.20

Range

444

14.8

 

Our average review time for 2000 was 4.9 months, which is slightly longer than last year’s average. Approximately 25.9 percent of our decisions were made in three months or less (this is a decrease from 36% in 2000, and it is consistent with the rate from 1999). Thus, our primary goal for the 2001 calendar year continues to be to reduce our average decision time.

 

6.      ISQ Website Update

 

We have not made significant changes to our website (http://www.public.iastate.edu/~isq) this year, with the exception of incorporating a more sophisticated counter in July. Between July and January, we received over 7,000 visits to the site (compared to 9,000 for all of 2000). We also average approximately 40 visits per day.

 

7.      Articles Forthcoming in 2002

 

Matthew A. Baum, “The Constituent Foundations of the Rally-Round-the-Flag Phenomenon”

 

Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, “Domestic Politics and International Relations”

 

Fred Chernoff, “Scientific Realism as a Meta-Theory of International Politics”

Colin Elman and Miriam Fendius Elman, “How Not to Be Lakatos Intolerant: Appraising Progress in IR Research”

 

Walter Enders and Todd Sandler, “Patterns of Transnational Terrorism, 1970-99: Alternative Time Series Estimates”

 

David Kinsella, “Rivalry, Reaction, and Weapons Proliferation: A Time-Series Analysis of Global Arms Transfers”

 

David Leblang, “The Political Economy of Speculative Attacks in the Developing World”

 

Quan Li and David Sacko, “The (Ir)Relevance of Militarized Interstate Disputes for International Trade”

 

Vincent Mahler, “Exploring the Subnational Dimension of Income Inequality”

 

Mark Schafer and Scott Crichlow, “The Process-Outcome Connection in Foreign Policy Decision Making”

 

Paul Wapner, “Beyond Sovereignty? Environmental Protection in a Postmodern Age”

 

Ka Zeng, “Trade Structure and the Effectiveness of America’s ‘Aggressively Unilateral’ Trade Policy”