Each submission will be reviewed and evaluated by a minimum of two reviewers, and if it is deemed the submission is within the scope of the Practice Forum and makes a significant contribution, revisions may be requested.

If required, reviewers may review revised submissions, after which a decision to publish or not will be made by the section editor. The IOP editor may also be requested to review and/or discuss submissions as needed.

Reviews and publication decisions will be made based on the clarity and quality of the article, contribution to the advancement of I-O practice, relevancy and appropriateness for the forum, originality/creativity of the submission/practice intervention, and/or effective integration of science with practice.

Publication decisions will be solely that of the Editor and it will be at his/her discretion that all submissions will be considered for publication.

Commentaries

Commentaries will be peer reviewed; it is expected that some will be accepted and some rejected. Criteria for acceptance include clarity and coherence of the position espoused, technical soundness, and reviewer judgment as to the degree to which the commentary contributes to greater insight and understanding of the topic.

One point of note is that a small set of reviewers read and evaluates all commentaries. Reviewers need to compare commentaries for issues of redundancy and to make evaluations of relative merit (e.g., given journal page constraints, which commentaries are strongest?). Given these demands on reviewers, the level of detail of reviewer comments will typically be far less than that received for typical journal submission.

One issue meriting special attention is redundancy. It is possible that two authors may submit highly similar commentaries. This creates difficulties, as both may be of high quality. We will use a variety of strategies in such a circumstance. These include editing one section of a broad commentary to eliminate the section redundant with another commentary, and working with the authors to pool their efforts and produce a joint commentary.