The verdict Reviewer
Revise first
Rejection IndexVery highDesk rejection is the most likely outcome as submitted.
“A sound empirical foundation. The problems are theoretical and methodological, and fixable without new data.”
A reviewer in your field, briefed by AI, reads your manuscript against the journal you name, before you submit.
What we check
AI reads for structure and evidence. A reviewer matched to your field and method judges theory, rigour and contribution. Every part of your report says who did it.
AIAI reads
- Structure and lengthEvery section a reviewer expects is there, inside the journal’s word limit.
- AbstractProblem, method, finding, contribution and limitations are all stated.
- Journal fitHow closely you match what the journal published recently, and which journals fit better.
- Recent papersThe journal’s recent work a reviewer will expect you to cite.
ReviewerYour reviewer judges
- Theory into methodThe lens you claim is actually used in the analysis.
- RigourWhether the design and estimation would survive this journal’s reviewers.
- Seven ratingsContribution, positioning, rigour, coherence, writing, fit and gap, rated against your tier.
AI + reviewerTogether
- Golden threadThe research question runs through theory, hypotheses, method and results without a break.
- The gapIt is established by evidence, and the design actually fills it.
- Contribution sizeBig enough for the tier you are aiming at.
- What to fix firstRevisions in order, with where they go and how much work each is.
ComputedRejection Index
Your desk-rejection risk band, calculated from the reviewer’s ratings and the journal evidence. Never estimated by AI.
What your report looks like
Three pages from our sample report, prepared for illustration. Yours follows the same structure, for your paper and your journal.
Download the full sample (PDF, 22 pages)Sample report · for illustrationPsychological Safety, Knowledge Sharing, and Innovative Work BehaviourTarget: Journal of Organizational Behavior · ABS 4*
Fix these first AI + reviewer
- 1Explain why transformational leadership is the boundary condition
- 2Integrate the three theories instead of using them selectively
- 3Treat endogeneity
Plus three more, in order, in the full report.
Where it fits AI
- Journal of Applied Psychology72 Strong fit
- Journal of Organizational Behavior68 Moderate fit
- Journal of Management65 Moderate fit
Alignment with each journal’s recent publications.
What it costs
Start with the free check. Go further when your paper needs it. Nothing is charged on this page.
Free check
AI£0
In seconds
You sendTitle, abstract, keywords and your target journal.
You get
- Completeness check of your abstract
- One finding explained in full
- Issue counts by category
- An indicative journal fit
AI Diagnostic
AI£20
In minutes, by email
You sendYour full manuscript and up to three target journals.
You get
- Diagnostic report on the whole paper
- Readiness Score out of 100
- One re-check of a revised version within 30 days
Expert review
AI + reviewer£249
Within seven days of upload
You sendYour manuscript, locked for review, and a note to your reviewer.
You get
- A matched reviewer in your field and method
- Submission-Ready Report with Rejection Index
- Journal fit and a revision roadmap
- One AI re-check of your revision
£229 if you used an AI Diagnostic in the last 60 days.
Who sees your paper
- Who reads it
- Only your matched reviewer, bound by our confidentiality protocol. Never a panel, never a journal.
- AI processing
- Through the Anthropic API, which does not train on API inputs. We do not reuse your content.
- Deletion
- Ask at [email protected] and all your data is deleted, confirmed within 5 working days.
- Editorial weight
- Our reviewers are not journal editors; reports carry no weight with any journal.
Submit your abstract
Free, and no full manuscript yet. We read the abstract to confirm the fit, then send you a secure upload link.