All AMS journals now formally accept Review articles (also called Reviews). Reviews are focused on a specific topic that synthesizes previous research accomplishments, summarizes the state of the science, and suggests avenues for future research.
Timely Reviews can be useful to our readership owing to their wide scope and concise synthesis of a particular research topic. Reviews can bridge the gap between out-of-date textbooks that may cover topics superficially and individual research articles that do not have the space or scope to summarize and synthesize a large body of literature. Reviews may be particularly useful to students and early-career researchers struggling with understanding the topic for a research paper, studying for their general qualifying examination, or writing up their dissertation research.
To learn more about our decision to formally accept Reviews, please see the 2018 editorial, "AMS Journals Welcome Review Articles."
Authors interested in submitting possible Reviews for consideration in an AMS technical journal must submit a formal proposal.
The proposal must include:
Proposals for Reviews must be submitted through the intended journal's Editorial Manager. Be sure to select Review proposal as the submission type.
Evaluation of proposals is overseen by the Chief Editor. The Chief Editor may solicit feedback from additional Editors, Associate Editors, or reviewers on the proposal and its suitability for the target journal. Formal review reports are not necessary. Evaluating a proposal may take up to one (1) month.
Corresponding authors will receive a decision letter with feedback collected and summarized. The feedback may not necessarily be given to the authors verbatim. Feedback may entail advice for the authors to make the manuscript more readable or comprehensive. The advice may also recommend improved focus and scoping of the potential Review topic in case the resulting manuscript, as proposed, would be too long or contain too many disparate subtopics. The usual maximum length of 7500 words for a manuscript submitted to an AMS journal (introduction through acknowledgements, not counting the abstract, references, or list of figure captions) may be waived at the discretion of the Chief Editor.
Once the proposal is approved, authors will have six (6) months to submit their manuscript. Like other submissions, Reviews must meet the high standards of AMS journals. They should be comprehensive across the discipline and not address only the authors’ own work.
If no manuscript is submitted within six months after the proposal is approved, the proposal will expire.
At the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, the submission process for Reviews is no different than the process for other BAMS submissions, which already require a proposal. (See Article Proposals for BAMS.) However, authors submitting a Review to BAMS should state in their proposal that it is intended to be a Review.
Editors will ensure the comprehensiveness and readability of the Review during the review process, possibly through employing a larger than usual number of peer reviewers. Such a large number of reviewers ensures that a community consensus and a breadth of expertise is obtained. Reviewers may be allowed more time than the standard four weeks to submit their review reports for manuscripts longer than 7500 words. Other than those differences, the editorial process will generally proceed as for a regular submission.
Reviews are considered a separate department of the journal and are published at the beginning of each issue under a separate “REVIEW” header as an indication of their prestige and importance. Reviews will also be available with the rest of the issue's content on AMS Journals Online.
For any further questions about Reviews, please contact the Chief Editor of the target journal.