specializes in publishing literature review articles

Submit a Manuscript

If you have NOT written the manuscript, fill in a proposal form and send it to the editor (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).

If you have written the mauscript, follow this link to access the submission site for Review of Communication Research.

In case you have any problem or doubt, write to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.



Are you exploring a new research question, but you cannot find an authorative literature review? Is there a seasoned scholar that you believe should use his or her experience to synthesize the field? Is there an upcoming colleague who could break down the state of literature in your field from a fresh and unconventional angle? Let us know! Fill in the following questionnaire and submit it.



Choose between Literature Insights and SoL format


Our New and Second Article Format: State of the Literature

Review of Communication Research is going to publish a second format which is similar but not equal to the standard literature reviews we are publishing (which we call literature insights.) It will be presented in a different section of the journal. We keep publishing our standard literature reviews, therefore you can choose which format you want to write.

Click here and watch the video we have prepared to explain to you the differences between the two formats.


Which format should you choose to write?


In our standard literature reviews (i.e., literature insights), authors (a) revise all the relevant literature written on a topic, (b) structure it by a relevant categorization criterion, (c) evaluate the literature critically, (d) offer a strong input to the literature, and (e) suggest future research. This input could be clarifying a problem, identifying relations unnoticed before, finding contradictions between theories, pointing out inconsistencies in findings presented in the literature, or summarizing published literature into a new definition or a new theory. It is not easy to push forward the literature in this way. That is the reason why Review of Communication Research requires authors of literature insights to be experienced. We would not follow this editorial policy if we published empirical research articles.

The state-of-the-literature articles (SoL) follow the same steps literature insights do, but they do not need to give any relevant theoretical push to published literature (step d). Therefore, SoL articles are less demanding than our literature-insights articles. Both experienced and less experienced authors can write and publish an SoL article.
In SoL articles, authors have to (a) revise all the relevant literature written on a topic, (b) structure it by a relevant categorization criterion, (c) evaluate the literature critically, therefore understand and explain the relations between the different variables, and (d) suggest future research.


Click here to watch a two-minutes video that will explain to you the process to publish an SoL article. You can also read here about the process to publish a literature-insights or an SoL article.


Why do we want to publish SoL articles?

The reason is straightforward: SoL articles are useful for the advancement of the Communication field. SoL articles explain what is known about a topic at a specific moment in time, and do it critically. Therefore, SoL articles help the scholars who start a research on a specific topic. For example, a scholar who starts a research on media effects and Facebook should search and read an SoL article to apprehend what is known about that topic at a specific moment in time. The article would work like a map and would give scholars a general vision to decide from which point to start. Book chapters have this function often. However, book chapters are unavailable in many libraries.



Ethical Standards for Authors

Ethical Standards for Authors


Review of Communication Research expects that all authors submitting a manuscript adhere to the ethical guidelines set by the International Communication Association (ICA) in the Publication Policies and Procedures. In this sense, all manuscripts submitted to RCR must be original works that:

(a) credit all authors,

(b) acknowledge sources and supporting material, and

(c) identify previous publication of the manuscript in an earlier form. The place, time, and form of the previous publication, and whether the present material duplicates or is substantially different than the earlier presentation, must be made explicit in a cover letter accompanying the manuscript submission. RCR does not publish articles that have been previously published in substantially the same form.

According to ICA policies and procedures, any manuscript submitted to RCR must not be simultaneously considered by another publication. If extraordinary circumstances call for simultaneous submission, RCR editor should be informed by the author(s). Decisions regarding the originality of and/or appropriateness of a submitted manuscript will be rendered by the editor. Submitting a manuscript to two journals at once duplicates the efforts of editors and peer reviewers to review the manuscript and any subsequent revisions that they request. If the manuscript is accepted in one journal the author will have to withdraw the paper from the second journal, wasting the time of the editors and peer reviewers who reviewed the manuscript.

The editorial office will provide no information regarding the status of a submission to anyone other than the author (or a person the author designates in writing) of a manuscript, book review, or other material submitted to RCR for publication.

Moreover, authors submitting a manuscript to RCR for publication adhere to the following ethical guidelines mostly copied from or inspired by APA Manual 6th Ed., Taylor and Francis Publisher ethical code, Elsevier’s Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK), and from Code of conduct and best practice guidelines for journal editors by COPE :

- Ethical Reporting of Research Results. Scholars do not fabricate or falsify data because science is build on previous research. Sometimes scientists make mistakes that are not identified during the reviewing process. It takes time and effort to correct a wrong result. It is not acceptable that a scholar misleads others on purpose, for personal benefit. In this sense, “omitting troublesome observations from reports to present a more convincing story is also prohibited” and “authors are responsible for making such errors public if the errors are discovered after publication” (APA, 6th: 12).

- All authors must declare that the article they submit to RCR is their own original work, which does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any other person or entity, and cannot be considered as plagiarizing any other published work. If an author is submitting a manuscript which includes his or her own previously published work, new content has to be more than 50% of the manuscript.

- If the manuscript incorporates any previously copyrighted material (e.g. graphs, images) which is not in the public domain, author/s shall obtain written permission from the copyright owner of such material to be published in RCR, and shall deliver such written permission to RCR prior to the submission of the Article Proposal if the copyrighted material is their own writing, or prior to the publication if the copyrighted material is a graph, image, table or text with more than 400 words.

- All authors named on the paper are equally held accountable for the content of a submitted manuscript or published paper.

- The corresponding author must ensure all named co-authors consent to publication and to being named as a co-author. All persons who have made significant scientific or literary contributions and who shares responsibility and accountability for the results to the work reported should be named as co-authors.

- Authors must appropriately cite all relevant publications. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, should not be used or reported in the author's work unless fully cited, and with the permission of that third party.

- Authors must avoid making defamatory statements in submitted articles which could be construed as impugning any person's reputation.

- Authors must declare any potential conflict of interest – be it professional or financial – which could be held to arise with respect to the article.

- Authors must disclose all sources of funding for the research reported in the paper.



This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Approved, April 2014


Call for Papers and Proposals

Review of Commmunication Research (RCR) specializes in publishing LITERATURE REVIEWS in the field of communication, and we accept manuscripts and proposals in any area. 

RCR is committed with free accessibility of scientific production to any scholar or student in any country in the world. Moreover, we do not charge any publication fee to authors. This policy may end in the future.

RCR is calling for papers and proposals for its next issues. Manuscripts will be published online with a doi number and a suggested reference as soon as they are accepted (i.e., at any time of the year) to make the available to readers.


If you have written the manuscript, register and upload it to

If you have not written the manuscript, fill in the proposal form, and send it to the editor (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)


 Why should you publish with us? Here there are some reasons




- RCR has an excellent Editorial Board, Associate Editors, and Editor, and invites the best scholars as ad-hoc reviewers.

- You can be part of a set of excellent authors who have published with us (W. James Potter--three times--, Timothy Levine, James D. Ivory, Maxwell McCombs, Talia Stroud, James P. Dillard, Lijiang Shen, Kory Floyd, Scott W. Campbell, Robert Abelman, John Sherry, Daniel McDonald, Rajiv Rimal, Douglas McLeod--twice--, Anneke De Graaf, José Sanders, Hans Hoeken, Jake Harwood, and a long etcetera.)

- The double-blind peer-review process plus the open-peer review assure the best standards of editorial quality.

- One of the first articles we published was awarded by the Distinguished Article Award of NCA's Communication and Social Cognition Division. Our published articles have, at least, the same high quality since then.



High Impact

- The articles we publish are downloadable by anybody in the world. The articles we have published have been downloaded by scholars from the USA, China, Europe, but also from most countries around the globe. Name it, from A to Z. Albania? Yes; Algeria? Yes; Bahrain? Yes; Bangladesh? Yes; (...); Uganda? Yes; Uzbekistan? Yes; Venezuela? Yes; Zambia? Yes; Zimbabwe? Yes.

- Scholars will reach your article. For example, McCombs and Stroud's article has been downloaded almost 15,500 times from the official website only.

- Our articles are listed in Web of Science, Scopus, and other databases. 

- The fact that articles are available online and citable as soon as it is accepted is an additional factor that helps to rise our articles impact factor.

- Here we offer you some statistics that can give you an idea of our citation performance:

1. RCR ranks #3 of 415 for the SNIP indicator by SCOPUS. SNIP is "the ratio of a source's average citation count per paper and the citation potential of its subject field." (...) "It helps you make a direct comparison of sources in different subject fields." (

snip 2018


2. RCR has a Scopus CiteScore Tracker 2019 of 4.6 on February 2020.

3. RCR articles have an average citation per item of 10.1 in Web of Science in February 2020 (RCR is included in Web of Science Core Collection.)

4. The Impact Factor that an external organization has calculated using Journal of Citations Reports (JCR) statistic for 2018 is 5.7 (please, note that RCR is indexted in Web of Science but it is not ranked in JCR.)

Ask us for more information or visit the source:




You can check the statement of our impact factor by confirming the data with Scopus Google Scholar, or Web of Science.



Long-Term Availability

We assure the long-term permanence in open-access repositories (e.g., Internet Archive; Academia; Social Science Open Access Repository, SSOAR).

The articles have an assigned DOI number for permanent location.

Authors and scholars are free to save the article in any repository they wish and to distribute the articles as they wish, as long as it is not for commercial use.



Diamond Open Access

Diamond Open Access means that anybody from any country in the world can download and read the articles. In this way, we are supporting a fair distribution of academic knowledge. Diamond Open Access means that authors can distribute the articles as they wish, as long as there is no commercial benefit. Finally, Diamond Open Access means that authors do not have to pay Articles Prochessing Charges.


Free of Charges

We do not charge any fee to authors.



Write to us: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.