Red Review Process

---
name: red-review-process
description: Use to understand and plan around the Review of Economic Dynamics (RED) editorial process — the editor desk/suitability screen, single-anonymized refereeing with a minimum of two reviewers, and SED's fast ~two-month average post-desk turnaround. Sets expectations and timelines; it is not the submission preflight (see red-submission).
---

# Review Process at RED (red-review-process)

## When to trigger

- Setting expectations on timing and review model before or after submitting
- Understanding what the desk screen decides and what reaches referees
- Planning around the single-anonymized (not double-blind) model

## How RED review works (verified)

- **Desk / suitability screen first.** The editor first assesses whether the paper is suitable for RED;
  papers that pass are sent out for review. A clean, in-scope, dynamic-model paper clears this faster.
- **Single-anonymized review.** Reviewers' identities are concealed from authors, but **author identities
  are visible to reviewers** — this is *not* double-blind, so you do **not** anonymize the manuscript.
- **Minimum of two reviewers.** Suitable papers go to at least **two independent referees**.
- **Speed is a feature.** The SED advertises fast reviews, targeting roughly a **two-month average
  post-desk turnaround** — RED positions itself among the more efficient journals in economics.
- **Coordinating Editor.** **Loukas Karabarbounis** (University of Minnesota / Minneapolis Fed) is RED's
  Coordinating Editor (the editor-in-chief equivalent). *(Some third-party sources are outdated on this — 待核实 elsewhere, but SED's own page is authoritative.)*

## Planning implications

- Single-anonymized means **keep self-citations and acknowledgments natural** — no double-blind scrubbing.
- The fast-turnaround target rewards a **complete, runnable** submission with replication discipline
  already in place; do not submit a paper whose code archive does not yet exist.
- Plan around a **post-desk** clock that starts only after the suitability screen and the fee.

## Checklist

- [ ] Manuscript is **not** anonymized (single-anonymized model)
- [ ] Paper is in-scope and complete enough to clear the desk screen quickly
- [ ] Expectations set for ≥2 referees and a ~two-month post-desk target
- [ ] Replication materials staged so a fast acceptance is not bottlenecked

## Anti-patterns

- Double-blind-scrubbing a manuscript for a single-anonymized journal
- Expecting the ~two-month clock to cover the desk screen or fee step
- Treating slow-journal habits (thin appendix, no code) as acceptable here

## Supplementary resources

- [`red-submission`](../red-submission/SKILL.md) — the pre-submission preflight
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — review-model and timing sources