Language-Sensitive Review (LSR) Pathway
The Language-Sensitive Review Pathway supports Spanish-speaking and Mandarin Chinese-speaking SRCD researchers submitting to SRCD journals by providing optional, pre-peer-review feedback from field-knowledgeable SRCD member reviewers fluent in their language. The pathway helps ensure manuscripts are evaluated on the strength of the science, not assumptions about the author's English fluency.
About the Pathway
The Language-Sensitive Review (LSR) Pathway is a free, opt-in initiative developed by the Society for Research in Child Development through an 18-month grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
The pilot launches with two SRCD journals, Child Development and Child Development Perspectives, and two language communities: Spanish-speaking and Mandarin Chinese-speaking researchers. As SRCD learns from the pilot, expansion to additional languages may be considered.
Before a manuscript enters formal peer review, eligible authors may be connected with an SRCD member reviewer who shares their linguistic background and has expertise in the relevant scientific field. That reviewer serves as a knowledgeable language partner, offering focused feedback to help the manuscript communicate the author’s intended meaning clearly in English.
LSR is not translation, copyediting, or an additional gatekeeping stage. It is part of SRCD’s commitment to global scientific collaboration and inclusive participation in developmental science.
Why This Matters
Strong developmental science is produced across linguistic, cultural, and regional contexts worldwide. However, researchers who write in English as an additional language may face barriers in scholarly publishing when the presentation of the English affects how their work is received.1
In English-language peer review, clarity of writing can sometimes be mistaken for clarity of science2. A manuscript may contain rigorous, meaningful research, but still be disadvantaged if reviewers struggle to follow the author’s intended meaning because of language, structure, style, or phrasing.
The LSR Pathway responds to this challenge3 by creating a collegial step before formal peer review. By pairing authors with reviewers who understand both the language and the science, the pathway helps authors strengthen manuscript clarity while preserving the integrity of the standard editorial and peer review process.
The goal is not to change what authors are substantively trying to say. The goal is to help ensure that their scientific contribution can be fairly understood and fairly assessed during the peer review process.
How It Works
Authors submitting to Child Development or Child Development Perspectives through ScholarOne will be able to indicate whether they would like their manuscript to be considered for Language-Sensitive Review.
Authors who opt in may also upload a Spanish or Mandarin Chinese version of their manuscript as a reference document for the LSR reviewer. This version is used only to support language-sensitive feedback and is not part of the formal peer review process.
Once a submission enters the LSR workflow, the manuscript is assigned to a vetted SRCD member reviewer fluent in the author’s language and knowledgeable in the relevant field. The reviewer provides structured feedback focused on clarity, flow, terminology, and places where the English may not fully reflect the author’s intended scientific meaning.
After the LSR reviewer completes their feedback, the manuscript proceeds through the journal’s standard editorial and peer review process. LSR reviewers do not make publication recommendations, and LSR feedback is not a substitute for formal peer review.
Reviewer Role
Language-Sensitive Reviewers are SRCD members who bring both developmental science expertise and meaningful fluency in Spanish or Mandarin Chinese. They serve as language partners for authors navigating English-language scholarly publishing.
Reviewers may provide feedback on:
- Clarity of the manuscript’s central argument and organization.
- Places where word choice, sentence structure, or terminology may obscure the author’s intended scientific meaning.
- Consistency of key concepts and constructs across the manuscript.
- Sections where additional clarification would help readers follow the scientific contribution.
- Places where the original-language version and English-language version may diverge in meaning, if an original-language version is provided.
Reviewers do not rewrite manuscripts, evaluate scientific merit, make substantive changes to the author’s argument, recommend accept or reject, or function as peer reviewers.
Reviewer Engagement Tiers
LSR reviewers serve across three tiers that reflect increasing manuscript complexity and responsibility. The progression moves from identifying language-flow concerns, to helping align the English text with the author’s intended meaning, to handling complex cases and supporting other reviewers. Across all tiers, reviewers focus on clarity and accessibility rather than evaluating the scientific merit of the manuscript. Reviewers receive an honorarium based on the level of engagement.
Tier 1 — Language Flow Review
Reviewers assess the English-language manuscript for clarity, readability, and passages that could be misunderstood. They identify areas needing attention and explain what may be unclear, without rewriting the author’s text. This tier provides a strong entry point for early-career scholars and reviewers newer to language-sensitive review.
Tier 2 — Meaning Alignment Review
Reviewers work with manuscripts where the author’s intended meaning is more difficult to determine from the English text alone. When original-language material is available, reviewers may consult it to help clarify meaning. They may also provide targeted phrasing suggestions when explanation alone would not fully resolve the concern. This is the primary tier for most LSR assignments.
Tier 3 — Complex Review and Pathway Support
Reviewers handle the most complex cases, including manuscripts where meaning is substantially obscured or culturally specific language requires additional care. They may also respond to questions from Tier 1 and Tier 2 reviewers and advise SRCD on the continued development of the pathway. This role provides added support and expertise but does not include editorial decision-making authority.
Author Participation
The LSR Pathway is open to researchers submitting to Child Development or Child Development Perspectives whose manuscripts are written in English and whose primary language is Spanish or Mandarin Chinese.
Participation is optional and free. Participation in LSR has no bearing on a manuscript’s standing in formal peer review.
Authors who receive LSR feedback are responsible for revising and finalizing their manuscripts before they proceed through the journal’s editorial and peer review process. LSR feedback is collegial guidance from a peer; it is not editorial direction and does not commit the journal to any publication outcome.
As part of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation grant, SRCD will document author and reviewer experiences throughout the pilot period. This evaluation work will help inform whether and how the LSR Pathway continues and expands beyond the pilot.
Get Involved
SRCD invites applications from members interested in serving as Language-Sensitive Reviewers. Applications for our inaugural cohort are currently open.
The deadline to apply is Monday, August 31, 2026.
For questions about the LSR Pathway, contact Roman McNeil, Science and Publications Programs Specialist, at rmcneil@srcd.org.
1 Smith, O.M., Davis, K.L., Pizza, R.B. et al. Peer review perpetuates barriers for historically excluded groups. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 512–523 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-023-01999-w
2 Romero-Olivares, A. L. (2019, October 3). Reviewers, don't be rude to nonnative English speakers. American Association for the Advancement of Science. https://www.science.org/content/article/reviewers-don-t-be-rude-nonnative-english-speakers.
3 Wang, J., & Moody, H. (2025). Language inclusion intentions in scoping reviews. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 113(4), 290–297. ;https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2025.2170.
