Post Your Answer
2 years ago in Publications , Scholarly Etiquette By Varun
Is the length appropriate for the venue (often 800-1500 words for academic reviews)?
I've received conflicting advice on this. Some senior scholars say to be concise, while others develop extensive critiques. How do I strategically determine the right depth and word count, especially when a journal's guidelines are vague or simply state "be brief"?
Â
ÂAll Answers (1 Answers In All)
By Aamir Answered 1 year ago
This is a crucial matter of scholarly etiquette. First, always check the journal's official guide for authors; if it says 1000 words, do not submit 1500. If it's vague, I recommend studying 3-4 recent reviews in that specific journal to reverse-engineer their standard. In my field, 800-1200 words is the sweet spot. It forces you to be incisive. Remember, a review is not a monograph; it's a focused evaluation. Exceeding the unofficial limit signals a lack of discipline to editors.
Reply to Aamir
Related Questions