{"id":466,"date":"2026-02-03T10:13:33","date_gmt":"2026-02-03T10:13:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/postgradproofreader.co.uk\/blog\/?p=466"},"modified":"2026-02-03T10:14:39","modified_gmt":"2026-02-03T10:14:39","slug":"publishing-your-qualitative-study-how-to-select-a-journal-and-nominate-peer-reviewers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/postgradproofreader.co.uk\/blog\/2026\/02\/03\/publishing-your-qualitative-study-how-to-select-a-journal-and-nominate-peer-reviewers\/","title":{"rendered":"Publishing your qualitative study: How to select a journal and nominate peer reviewers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Congratulations \u2013 you\u2019ve written a paper based on your qualitative study, and now you\u2019re deciding where to try to publish. That\u2019s fantastic! Getting a few peer-reviewed publications under your belt is an essential step in the academic career path. However, if you\u2019ve not done it before, the publication process can feel daunting. Don\u2019t worry: PGPR are here to guide you.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

NB: If you\u2019re not quite at this stage yet, you might want to check out our previous blogs, How to write a qualitative paper<\/a>, How to get your qualitative study read for publication<\/a> and How to make your writing sing<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Congratulations: You’re ready to publish!\u00a0 Photo by Yen Vu<\/a> on Unsplash<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

 <\/p>\n

Selecting a journal<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Make a list of journals that publish in your area<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The process of reading existing research and writing your reference list will mean that you have almost certainly internalised the names of more relevant journals than you think. Jot those down, then look through your reference list for others you haven’t remembered. Ask your co-authors for their ideas. Do a Google search for \u2018journal\u2019 + your topic. This should result in a good list for you to consider.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Check which are open to publishing qualitative research<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      This is essential! There is no point submitting your study, beautiful as it might be, to a journal that has never published any qualitative work before. Doing so will waste both your time and the editors\u2019 time, so do everyone a favour and search the archives of your longlisted journals for the word \u2018qualitative\u2019 in the titles of published articles. If there are none, cross that one off your list.<\/p>\n

      Ideally, you want to find a journal that often publishes qual work and has published at least some articles using your methodology. Of course, there are some qual-specific journals out there, such as Qualitative Research and the Journal of Qualitative Health Research. These will always be open to qualitative work, and their reviewers will have the expertise to provide relevant, helpful feedback.<\/p>\n

      \"\"
      Check your chosen journal publishes qualitative research before submitting.
      Photo by       Yen Vu<\/a> on Unsplash<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
        \n
      1. Make a table of each journal\u2019s attributes<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        This table should include the journal\u2019s impact factor \u2013 a number that indicates how often papers from this journal are cited and so how prestigious the journal is \u2013 their word count (you can\u2019t publish three GETs from your beautiful IPA study in a journal whose maximum word count is 2,000), who the readers of the journal are, whether or not it is open access and so on. It could be that your co-authors have had good or bad experiences publishing in the papers on your list; if so, include that too.<\/p>\n

        Note that if you are choosing to publish in an open-access journal, your university will need to pay some rather weighty fees, so do check that they have the budget for that before pursuing that route.<\/p>\n

         <\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Rank journals in order of preference, depending on your priorities<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Looking at this information in table form will help you decide which journal to target first. If you have high ambitions for forging a lofty academic career (and why not?), aim for the high-impact journals first. Just be prepared for the potential of a knock-back, and be ready to move on to the next journal on the list. If your priority is to get your research seen by other qual researchers sooner rather than later, consider a less high-impact journal with a stronger proven track record for qual researchers. (Unfortunately, these two things often go hand in hand!)<\/p>\n

          For what it\u2019s worth, I don\u2019t think that impact factors mean much more than a plus point on your CV. I don\u2019t know of any academics who find papers to read based on the impact factor of the journal. Instead, just as you very likely did, other academics use Google Scholar to look for papers in the relevant area, read them, and cite the best ones, often not worrying at all about which journal those papers are in. So I never really worry about impact factors. However, if you are more ambitious in that area, I doff my cap to you and wish you the best of luck.<\/p>\n

          \"\"
          Deciding which journals to target takes some thought.
          Photo by           No Revisions<\/a> on Unsplash<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
            \n
          1. Read through the author guidelines of your chosen journal<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Once you\u2019ve decided on your ideal journal, the next step is to carefully read over the author guidelines and ensure your paper follows them. This might involve changing your references from APA7 to Harvard (not an issue if you\u2019ve used referencing software \u2013 a right pain if you haven\u2019t, I\u2019m afraid!), cutting a few words or changing from UK to US spelling. Following the guidelines as closely as possible at this stage will save you hassle later on. I recommend saving a new version of the paper and adding the journal to the title so you can revert to your original if it isn\u2019t accepted the first time.<\/p>\n

             <\/p>\n

              \n
            1. Ensure you have cited any relevant papers from your chosen journal<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              This is self-explanatory! Do a quick search of recent editions of your chosen journal and include any relevant references. This will show the journal\u2019s editors that you\u2019ve paid attention to their publication.<\/p>\n

               <\/p>\n

                \n
              1. Write a killer cover letter<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                Ensure you\u2019ve written a confident and concise cover letter before you start the submission process. This is your chance to tell the editor why their publication and readership need to read your amazing research. Again, check the author guidelines for any instructions on what to include in the letter for your chosen journal.<\/p>\n

                \"\"
                Sadly, academic publishing involves some rejection.
                Photo by Steve Johnson<\/a> on Unsplash<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

                8. Be prepared for some rejection<\/p>\n

                Unfortunately, publishing academic work comes with its fair share of rejection, which can sting, especially when you\u2019re starting out. Give yourself a day or two to feel the pain, then move on to the next journal. Keep working through your list until you find someone who recognises your genius and says yes!<\/p>\n

                If a journal rejects your paper but gives you some feedback, read that feedback carefully. If the reviewers have said anything you agree with, redraft the paper to smooth out those issues. If you don\u2019t agree, move on. The good news is that the longer you do this, the easier it becomes to shrug off any difficult feelings that come with rejection and keep moving forward.<\/p>\n

                 <\/p>\n

                Submitting your paper involves filling out a long, complex online form and is often more frustrating than you want it to be! Give yourself a good hour or so to complete this process, and ensure that you have all relevant info to hand before you get started, such as your co-authors\u2019 contact details and your cover letter. If possible, look through the form before you get started so you can spot anything you might need to ask your supervisor about in advance.<\/p>\n

                One thing you will need to do is nominate peer-reviewers; that is, experts in your field who you would ideally like to review your paper. Peer reviewers decide whether your work is ready for publication and, if not, what needs to change. It is extremely rare for a paper to be accepted with no revisions, so be ready to respond to your reviewers\u2019 comments before publication.<\/p>\n

                 <\/p>\n

                How to nominate peer reviewers:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. Have this discussion with your co-authors before you submit<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  It\u2019s really frustrating to be 75% of the way through submitting your paper before you realise that you haven\u2019t discussed potential reviewers with your co-authors, as that means you have to pause the process to have that conversation. Therefore, I recommend going into the submission process with a list of agreed-upon potential reviewers to nominate, along with their institutions and contact details.<\/p>\n

                  \"\"
                  Talk to your co-authors about which peer reviewers to nominate.
                  Photo by                   Brooke Cagle<\/a> on Unsplash<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

                  2. Who can\u2019t review your work?<\/p>\n

                  For obvious reasons, you cannot nominate current or recent co-authors, someone at your institution, a mentor, close colleague or friend. Therefore, tempting as it might be, don\u2019t put any of those friendly faces on your list.<\/p>\n

                   <\/p>\n

                  3. Who should review your work?<\/p>\n

                  As mentioned above, your nominated reviewers should be experts in the field. I believe it\u2019s more important that these people are qualitative researchers (or at least open to qualitative research) than that they are well-versed in your exact topic. Otherwise, you run the risk of reviews from people who don\u2019t understand qualitative research and will waste your time asking about generalisability or insisting that you should have reported data saturation in your three-participant IPA study. If you can think of people who are qual researchers and also experts in your topic, all the better. You can find people like this by looking at who wrote the work you\u2019ve cited and asking your co-authors for ideas.<\/p>\n

                   <\/p>\n

                  4. Make sure you\u2019ve cited their relevant work<\/p>\n

                  Once you\u2019ve decided on a few names, check whether these people have published a relevant paper that you have somehow missed. If you find something important, cite it. Everyone is susceptible to flattery. Plus, if the work is relevant, the reviewers will certainly point out that you\u2019ve missed it, so this saves everyone time.<\/p>\n

                  \"\"
                  Make sure you’ve cited your ideal peer-reviewers in your paper.
                  Photo by                   Daniel Thomas<\/a> on Unsplash<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

                  5. If possible, list more than two people<\/p>\n

                  Bear in mind that your nominated reviewers are not under any obligation to say yes. Academics are stressed, busy people and reviewing is not paid work. For example, I probably review only one in every five papers I\u2019m asked to read. I say no to any quantitative papers or those I have no expertise in at all (so again, do everyone a favour and only nominate people who have the relevant knowledge), but also have to say no to some fascinating-sounding papers because I don\u2019t have the time to read them. Therefore, the longer your list of potential reviewers, the better.<\/p>\n

                   <\/p>\n

                  In my experience, if a paper is about a strong, important study and you are targeting relevant journals, you will only need to try two or three publications before you find the right home for your work. The more experienced you become at this, the more likely it is that you\u2019ll find the right journal the first time around.<\/p>\n

                  If you need any help preparing your study for publication, contact PGPR using the form below. We are qualitative experts who offer proofreading and feedback to postgrad students like you.<\/p>\n

                  <\/div>