Quarterly Journal of Economics Submission Guide

Source: Clarivate JCR 2024, QJE editorial disclosures (accessed April 2026).

Source: QJE submission instructions.

Use this page when deciding:

• whether the empirical identification strategy is strong enough for QJE
• whether the theoretical contribution is novel rather than incremental
• whether the contribution generalizes beyond the specific setting

• a clear substantive question of broad economics relevance
• a credible identification strategy (empirical) or novel mechanism (theoretical)
• comprehensive robustness checks
• a connection to broader economics literature
• a cover letter establishing the contribution clearly

• Weak identification. Empirical papers without a credible causal identification strategy are routinely returned.
• Incremental theoretical contribution. Minor variants of established models without a novel mechanism.
• Narrow specialist focus. Findings whose value depends on the specific empirical setting.
• Missing robustness. Empirical claims without alternative specifications, placebo tests, or sensitivity analysis.
• Cover letter overstates contribution. QJE editors are skeptical of inflated novelty claims.

QJE is one of the top-five economics journals (with AER, Econometrica, JPE, ReStud). The editorial standard is exceptionally high.

Identification-first empirical standard: QJE editors triage on identification strategy before examining the substantive findings. A paper without credible identification is desk-rejected within days.

The 70-80% desk rejection rate: decisive editorial screen.

Broad economics framing: QJE serves the broad economics community, not just one subfield. Papers must connect to wider literature and have generalizable implications.

The strongest QJE cover letters establish:

• the substantive question and its broad economics relevance
• the identification strategy (empirical) or novel mechanism (theoretical) in 1-2 sentences
• the central finding and its generalizable implications
• comparison to closely related QJE, AER, or NBER literature

• Is QJE a good journal?
• American Economic Review submission guide

Before upload, run your manuscript through a QJE identification and contribution readiness check.

In our pre-submission review work with economics manuscripts targeting QJE, three patterns generate the most consistent desk rejections.

In our experience, roughly 40% of QJE desk rejections trace to identification-strategy weakness in empirical papers. In our experience, roughly 25% involve incremental theoretical advances. In our experience, roughly 20% arise from contributions that don't generalize beyond the specific empirical setting.

• Identification-strategy weakness in empirical papers. QJE editors expect a credible causal identification strategy (RCT, IV with strong first-stage, RDD with bandwidth justification, DiD with parallel trends evidence). We observe that papers relying on observational variation without a clear identification argument are routinely desk-rejected. SciRev community data on top-five economics journals confirms identification as the dominant filter.

• Incremental theoretical advances. Editors at QJE look for novel mechanisms, not minor variants of established models. We see manuscripts proposing small extensions of existing models routinely declined with the suggestion to redirect to a more specialized journal.

• Context-specific contributions without generalization. QJE expects insights that extend beyond the specific empirical setting. We find that papers whose value is limited to one country, industry, or time period are routinely returned. A QJE identification and contribution readiness check can identify whether the package supports a top-five submission.

Clarivate JCR 2024 bibliometric data places QJE among top-five economics journals globally. SciRev community data confirms 3-5 month first-decision windows.

In multiple QJE pre-submission reviews, three additional warning signs recur. First, manuscripts where the abstract states a finding before stating the identification strategy tend to be flagged for "where is the identification?" feedback during desk screening, even when the underlying empirical work is rigorous. Second, papers that use natural-experiment language without showing pre-trends, falsification tests, or sensitivity to bandwidth choices receive friction at editorial triage. Third, papers that frame the contribution narrowly to one specific sample (one country, one industry, one decade) draw the "doesn't generalize" feedback that is one of the dominant rejection patterns at top-five economics journals. Researchers who anticipate these three signals before submission have a meaningfully higher chance of clearing the editorial screen at QJE, AER, ReStud, JPE, or Econometrica.