Do you plan to publish your research? No

Why or why not? Unable to spend the time needed to collect data. Plan to focus on finding a position in Human Resources or I/O psychology.

What might be some challenges to the process? The peer review process and the patience required.

----------------------------------Some reference information provided below

Peer Reviews

In comparison, peer reviews assess the scientific and clinical rigor of the manu- script: the explanation of the rationale and significance of the research, com- pleteness of the methods, appropriate analyses, clear presentation of results, fair balance of scientific (and clinical) discussion, and accurate summary in the conclusions (Table 1, right column).

Editors choose potential peer reviewers who are well- recognized authors of high-quality articles with sufficient expertise in the therapeutic area or scientific field. Peer review- ers may be assistants to full professors, researchers, clinicians, policy makers, and sometimes industrial scientists.12 Most peer reviewers adhere to the Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)13 and follow the guidelines of the publisher and journal. For example, the PLOS series of journals provide guidelines found under the individual journal names, which include questions for evaluating the validity and quality of the manuscript.14 Less-detailed checklists are common. On average, volunteer peer reviewers spend 5 hours/manuscript to read, critique the manuscript, and review it. 15 If a peer reviewer has concerns on ethical behavior, s/he sends a confidential note to the editor who can address the ethical concern with the corresponding author and, if necessary, contact the author's institution.

Table 1. Functions of Editorial and Peer Review

Initial Editorial Review	Peer Reviews
Scope	Scientific accuracy
Adherence to journal guidelines	Novelty, timeliness
Gatekeeper role (citeability, balance topics)	Rigor of experimental design and analyses
Readable for peer reviewers	Clarity of presentation of results
Compliance with ethical guidelines	Completeness, fair balance of discussion, supported conclusions
Choose and contact peer reviewers; confirm acceptance and follow-up	Provide comments and ask questions that guide authors to improve manuscript

References

Molnar-Kimber, K., & Halford, C. (2019). Art of Writing Effective Response Letters to Editors and Peer Reviewers. AMWA Journal: American Medical Writers Association Journal, 34(3), 125-143.