What's the Right Journal?

Hi Reader, where do you normally publish your papers?

But why exactly there? It remains one of the most important decisions for your career.

If you’re unsure where to publish or if you’re considering switching journals, how do you find a good fit?

Here is a pragmatic 7-step framework that should help you make a decision:

Step 0 – Build an Initial List

First, create a list of potential journals. While several will be top of mind, consider including those that you regularly read papers from.

You can also use AI or a simple Google search, for example:

“journal + [your field] + [2-3 relevant keywords].” Think about what your reader would search for if they forgot the title of your future paper.

Then, especially if you are a junior scientist, ask senior researchers or colleagues where they usually publish.

Now, the goal is to filter out journals that are not a good fit.

Step 1 – Scope Fit

Check for topic alignment and article format (normally available in the "Scope" section of a journal’s website).

If you are unsure whether your work would fit, you can write a short email to the editorial office or editors.

Don’t just “try your luck” based on the title of a journal - that can be a huge waste of time.

Step 2 – Check Feasibility

Ask yourself: “Is my paper competitive for this journal?”

Consult metrics such as Journal Impact Factor and briefly cross-check the novelty and depth of the papers published there.

To evaluate other papers, make sure to consider:

• The novelty and diversity of methods used
• The number (and complexity) of figures
• How extensive and comprehensive the overall contribution of new knowledge is

If the journal consistently publishes much larger or more groundbreaking studies, the likelihood of being desk-rejected is high.

You should certainly consult rejection rates to gauge a journal’s rigor. However, if rejection rates are high, don’t be concerned - the work actually published there is often a more reliable way to assess your chances.

Step 3 – Consider Time

Although often overlooked, time can become critical when it comes to

• Highly anticipated or competitive work
• Grant reports
• Students with PhD thesis deadlines and expiring contracts

Therefore, look up the average time to first decision and time to publication.

While it's not uncommon for review processes to take 6–12 months, in some cases, particularly for novel work in high-impact journals, time to publication can extend to two years or more.

On the one hand, you want proper peer review to assure or enhance the value of your work.

However, if you aim to publish in higher-impact-factor journals, there is a greater chance that the time to publication will be extended due to revisions and requests for additional experiments.

Step 4 – Review Affordability

Especially with the rise of several new publication models in recent years, you should check how a given journal operates.

The relevant question then becomes: Does your institution have a subscription?

If you are aiming for open access (or your funder requires it), what are the article processing charges (APCs)?

Pro tip: Always check whether waiver options are available.

Step 5 – Define Your Preferences

We have addressed author rights and journal innovativeness.
Now it’s about your personal priorities:

• If you want to post a preprint (or you are required to through your grant!), does the journal allow it?
• If you value open data, does the journal support data sharing?
• If you want to support the academic community, not shareholder profit, is it a society journal?

Step 6 – Control Legitimacy

Be cautious of journals that promise unusually fast review times or use overly promotional language. This also applies to journals that are “run by” or “supported by” larger publishers.

• First, check whether the journal is indexed in Web of Science, Scopus, or PubMed (don't trust claims of the journal).
• Second, verify that the editorial board consists of real, active researchers. Look for signs of activity beyond the website, such as a social media presence or conference involvement.
• Third, consult lists or indices that identify predatory journals (but remember that these lists are never exhaustive and are, to some extent, subjective).

In essence, untransparent websites, unclear responsibilities, and overly flattering email invitations often signal questionable credibility.

My personal view: when in doubt, exclude the journal. There is little more frustrating than later discovering that you published in a predatory journal, as it can render your paper essentially irrelevant.

Step 7 – Test the Audience Fit

Finally, ask: “Will the people who should read my work actually read this journal?”

Although some publishers are widely known, the large number of journals they operate may reduce the visibility of your paper.

While there is no single perfect metric, you can ask:

• How long has the journal been around?
• Do senior scientists recognize it?
• Do papers from this journal appear in your literature searches?

Some Personal Remarks

Take your time with these steps, as you typically go through this process only every few years.

Few scientists actually make up their own mind in such a comprehensive manner - thus, even experienced researchers occasionally end up publishing in journals that later turn out to be predatory.

That basically means a lost paper and a threat to their status.

Of course, always feel free to add additional steps and assess other metrics we discussed previously.

This way, you won’t get stuck if you receive a rejection.

How We Feel Today