I submitted to a journal a fairly novel psychology theory in the form of a manuscript that our research group put together. I am the first author and did most of the research. The paper is currently with a journal. I see the first reviewer has returned his report. We are waiting for reviewer two.

My next follow-up project would be to create a type of questionnaire to measure the theory. My key question: Should I start working on such a project before receiving comments from the peer reviewers on my initial project/submission? Couldn't the peer reviewers/editor ask for major revisions which would affect my questionnaire?

My PI has continuously been asking me for the project status but I've been telling him: I'm waiting to first hear back for comments from the "main psychology theory" before building a questionnaire. Is this the correct way of doing things in academia - my approach?

1 Answer 1


I think you should never delay your projects based on unsure events. The referee report may take a long time, and you'll have wasted precious time. Also, it's unlikely that a referee will change your mind about your own work. You probably know what the questionaire should look like by now.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .