Skip to main content
Basic Technical IVT Commonly tested

Editorial Decision Communication

noun phrase

Pronunciation: /ˌɛdɪˈtɔːriəl dɪˈsɪʒən kəˌmjuːnɪˈkeɪʃən/

The formal notification process through which editors convey acceptance, rejection, or revision requirements to authors with detailed explanations and reviewer feedback. Clear communication establishes transparency and supports author understanding of decisions.

Plain English

Telling authors whether their manuscript is accepted, rejected, or needs revisions, along with the reasons why.

Etymology & History

Origin languageEnglish
Rooteditorial (Latin editus, published) + decision (Latin decidere, to cut off) + communication (Latin communicare, to share)
First recorded use1980s
Usage frequencyVery common

Usage

"Timely editorial decision communication improved author satisfaction ratings by providing comprehensive reviewer feedback."

Style guide notes: Use formal register; maintain professional tone throughout all editorial communications.

Also known as

decision notification editorial letter outcome communication

Contrasted with

delayed feedback vague guidance

Related Terms

Frequently Asked Questions

What should editorial decision communication include?

Decision rationale, anonymized reviewer comments, specific improvement suggestions, and appeal procedures if applicable.

How quickly should editorial decisions be communicated?

Within 2-4 weeks of decision, allowing authors sufficient time to respond or plan next steps.

Why Test Candidates on This?

Key competency for evaluating editorial professionalism, author relations, and institutional communication standards in journal management.

Required skill level: Mid

Editors from these organisations have used our services since 1998

Reuters BBC Oxford University Press Penguin Random House Springer Microsoft Suncor Energy United Nations Fisher Investments IBM The Home Depot KODAK CHEVRON