Last updated: April 2026 · 8 min read · Audience: Authors, students, early-career researchers · Reading level: Introductory
Introduction
Quality is the cumulative result of small decisions made consistently across the manuscript. There is no single change that transforms a weak paper into a strong one, but a series of focused passes — each addressing one dimension — produces materially better submissions than a single read-through ever does.
This page covers the practical revisions an author can make before peer review. Substantive changes to the underlying research are outside scope; the focus is on improvement of the manuscript representing existing work.
Five dimensions of manuscript quality
| Dimension | What strong looks like | What weak looks like |
|---|---|---|
| Contribution clarity | Stated in abstract, intro, conclusion | Reader has to infer |
| Methodology | Reproducible from the description alone | Steps missing or ambiguous |
| Literature engagement | Discusses relevant recent work | Cites old or peripheral sources |
| Writing | Each sentence necessary; logical flow | Repetition, padding, tangents |
| Formatting | Matches journal guidelines exactly | Approximate; reviewer-distracting |
Practical guidance
- Make the contribution explicit. State it in one sentence in the abstract, then expand in the introduction's final paragraph and the conclusion's first paragraph.
- Strengthen the methodology section by writing it as if a reader would attempt to reproduce the work. Identify gaps that emerge.
- Refresh the literature review. Cite at least 50% recent work (last 5 years) where applicable; cite work the reviewer is likely to know.
- Edit for clarity. Read the manuscript aloud; sentences that are awkward when spoken are usually awkward in print.
- Verify formatting against the journal's author guidelines line by line. Reference style, figure resolution, word counts, section structure.
- Run one final pass for ethical declarations: conflicts of interest, data availability, IRB approval where applicable.
Common quality gaps
Other recurring gaps: methodology sections that report what was done but not why, literature reviews that survey the field without engaging with it, and discussion sections that summarise rather than interpret.
Decision guidance
If revision time is limited, prioritise contribution clarity and methodology. These two dimensions affect every reader's evaluation; weakness in either is hard to compensate elsewhere. Writing polish and formatting are important but more easily fixed late in the process.
Example scenarios
Scenario: a student preparing a thesis chapter for journal submission
Thesis chapters are typically too long, too descriptive, and too inward-looking for journal format. The improvement work is largely subtraction: shorter introduction, condensed methodology summary, tighter discussion, removal of thesis-specific framing. Expect to lose 30–50% of the original length.
Scenario: a PhD researcher revising after rejection
After rejection with reviewer comments, address each comment systematically. Comments often cluster around two or three themes; addressing the underlying themes rather than the surface comments produces stronger revisions. Update the manuscript section by section, then read straight through to verify coherence.
Scenario: an early-career author submitting their first paper
First submissions benefit from external review by a colleague familiar with the journal's standards. Two hours of focused critique from one experienced reader typically identifies more issues than two days of self-editing. The cost is modest; the gain in revision quality is substantial.
What to do next
If the manuscript has been through a quality-improvement pass, the next step is the pre-submission checklist and target-journal selection. Authors targeting EP Journals Group venues can use the central submission form.
Frequently asked questions
Related topics across the knowledge centre
Comparison
EP Journals vs Predatory Journals: How to Tell the Difference
A practical comparison helping researchers distinguish legitimate structured open-access publishers, such as EP Journals, from predatory journals that lack genuine peer review, transparent fees, or verifiable editorial governance.
Comparison
Indexed vs Non-Indexed Journals: A Practical Comparison
A practical comparison of indexed and non-indexed journals across multiple indexing tiers, helping authors interpret indexing claims accurately and choose venues whose indexing matches their needs.
Publishing
Low-Cost Research Journals
Low-cost journals span subscription venues with no author fee, diamond open-access journals fully subsidised by institutions, and open-access journals with modest APCs. Verifying credibility matters more than the headline number.
Publishing
How to Publish a Research Paper in Law
A practical, field-specific guide to publishing research in law, covering norms, challenges, the step-by-step process, where to publish, and how to choose between journal types.
Resource
Journals for Students: Where to Publish Early Research
Students are typically best served by open-access journals that maintain transparent peer review, modest article processing charges (APCs), and clearly documented timelines.
Resource
Journals for Multidisciplinary Research
Multidisciplinary work fits journals explicitly oriented toward cross-field research, generalist scientific journals, or specialty journals where the work's primary discipline anchors. The choice depends on which audience the work most needs to reach.
Guide
Avoiding Plagiarism in Academic Research
A clear explanation of what counts as plagiarism in academic research, how to avoid it in practice, and how journals detect and respond to it.
Guide
What is Indexing in Academic Journals?
An overview of how academic indexing operates, the principal categories of indexing services, and the implications of indexing status for authors and journals.
Related reading and next steps
- Submission portal — Submit a manuscript through the central form
- Journals list — Six peer-reviewed journals across disciplines
- Writing a research paper step by step
- How to format a research paper
- Structured vs unstructured
- Publishing in engineering
Editorial enquiries
Questions about this guide or about preparing a manuscript for submission may be directed to the editorial office. Where a query relates to a specific journal in the portfolio, please indicate the journal abbreviation in your message.
Email: editor@ep-journals.org