Manuscript submissions and reviews: reflections from an associate editor

Approximately seven months ago, I took on the Quantitative Research Associate Editor (AE) role for World Leisure Journal (WLJ). As general background, I am also a current/past AE of Leisure Sciences and Journal of Leisure Research and have been involved with the review process as an AE for 15 years. In writing this editorial, I am reflecting on my time as an AE by considering what the goals for publication are for WLJ, and suggestions for authors and educators. Prior to continuing, I would like to note that the front end of this editorial is targeted at new researchers (early career or new to WLJ if mid/late-career) and the latter part is targeted at educators and prospective reviewers. According to our website (WLJ, n.d., para. 1):

The World Leisure Journal … [aims] to stimulate a broad discussion of critical leisure research and theory … and is dedicated to furthering our understanding of the benefits of leisure; advancing the quality of life, health, and well-being of individuals, communities, and nations; encouraging social inclusion and promoting social justice through leisure.

Heavily emphasized, and in bold, on its website is that the WLJ “welcomes submissions from multiple areas of study that reflect the diversity of ways in which leisure can be conceptualised and approached. Papers must be grounded in one or more leisure-related concepts, theories, or processes” (para. 2). According to SCImago’s (n.d.) website, WLJ aims “to stimulate and communicate research, theory, and critical thought in all areas that address leisure, including play, recreation, the arts and culture, sport, festivals and celebrations, health and fitness, and travel and tourism” (para. 1).

Why have I taken the time to point this out? One of my duties is to decide whether a manuscript is a fit for WLJ. Given that Leisure is a broad field of study and interdisciplinary by nature it is key to pay attention to the bold sentence above, as it exhibits Burdge’s (1983) reflections on “what are the criteria for published leisure research” and “who are the leisure researchers” (pp. 107–108). Manuscripts have been returned for major revisions (or rejected outright) because of a lack of connection between the various sub-areas (e.g. tourism/festivals, sport, technology, etc.) and leisure. The reason for this is simple; somewhere in the manuscript an argument must be made by the author(s) as to how their manuscript contributes to the general leisure literature. If your topic is on tourism and “x” or sport and “x,” then how is this study situated within the broader leisure literature on studies related to “x,” or how does the study’s theoretical framework expand other theories used in leisure that are complimentary? This provides your manuscript with context, it situates your study among others (i.e., it fills a gap or extends knowledge), and substantiates your contribution as a scholar. A tell-tale sign for most reviewers is just looking at your references. If there is a lack of some references from leisure journals, odds are that you have not read what is out there in the leisure/recreation literature to know where or what your contribution would be to the field.

My sense, as AE, is that most manuscripts submitted by early career researchers lack training in the “art” of manuscript submission. More training is needed in doctoral granting programmes on how to convert a thesis or dissertation into a manuscript – even with the 3-article format. Part of it might be that doctoral programmes have been progressively moving away from “traditional” leisure studies since the 1980s (Burdge, 1985) and we have seen a lack of attention devoted to a generalist approach to foundations of leisure (e.g., theories, motivations, benefits, movements) and more on specialization within an area. This notion of what is leisure and recreation theory, why it is important and how it can be used is essential to broadening understandings of leisure (Henderson et al., 2004).

In addition to foundational concepts, graduate programmes need to prepare the next generation of reviewers. This includes teaching American Psychological Association (APA) Style technical writing and making students purchase the latest edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA, 2020). Almost every leisure or recreation journal requires APA Style writing. Authors submitting manuscripts should not expect that reviewers will correct this. Reviewers can point it out to authors, but if APA writing errors are egregious some reviewers might reject the manuscript outright. It is frankly unprofessional to not follow technical writing expectations. This also includes how to correctly write up statistical results. Teaching graduate students how to review manuscripts will make them more sensitized for manuscript submissions and increase the cadre of future reviewers. In this post-COVID era, I sometimes request 15 or more reviewers before I can get two reviewers needed for one manuscript review. Pre-COVID, I feel faculty were more amenable to being a reviewer. If you are in a university that requires you to publish, you should also be willing to review and make yourself available (e.g., share your expertise through platforms like ORCID). As a doctoral student, I was taught that I should be willing to review one article for every two articles I have submitted. This was part of my graduate training and instilled professional service and contribution to our discipline. This should be inculcated as a norm for graduate programmes and for tenured/tenure-track/research faculty.

I want to close my remarks by making clear that WLJ is very open to all related fields/disciplines under the umbrella of leisure. Unlike previous earlier conceptualizations of leisure research as being separate from applied research (Burdge, 1985), or knowledge of behaviour vs. knowledge of practice (Sessoms, 2000), we welcome both conceptual and applied research submissions for WLJ. In my time with the WLJ editorial board, led by Editor-In-Chief, Dr. Sandro Carnicelli, I have found the editorial board to be multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary focused, inclusive of all areas of leisure research, very welcoming of the Global South, and intentionally seeking an array of diverse international experts on the editorial board (Carnicelli, 2023).