When Brendan Gough and I first pitched the idea for Qualitative Research in Psychology (QRP) to publishers back in the early 2000s, we envisaged it as a largely UK-based publication. Our impression was that, outside Englishspeaking parts of the globe, there was relatively little qualitative research being undertaken by psychologists and that England was the only European country that could sustain enough copy to keep a quarterly journal going. A perusal of the submission statistics would seem to support our belief — during the two years up to 2019, UK authors had submitted almost as many articles (n = 61) as the rest of Europe put together (n = 62). However, over the journal’s first 10 years (2004–2013), the former figure was more than double the latter. Of course, this doesn’t tell us much; it could be qualitative research is dwindling in UK psychology, or there are more outlets that accept qualitative articles from UK authors. What is notable is that the acceptance rates have changed. UK-origin articles submitted in the last two years are much more likely to be accepted (46% compared to 28% during the previous period; 22% is the overall acceptance rate). Perhaps UK authors have finally worked out what sort of articles to send us? Submissions from continental European countries display a surprising consistency. We receive roughly one article a year from Denmark, and more than half of these have been published (58%). We have only ever received four articles from the Netherlands, and are yet to publish one. The only discernible trend is a slight swing from Scandinavia to southern Europe. In the first 10 years, most of our European submissions from outside the United Kingdom came from Sweden (10) and Norway (9). Now it is Spain and Italy that send the most. In the Italian case, this may reflect a period during which we published several articles, but despite sending us a total of 16, we have failed to publish any sent from Spain. Of course, as qualitative researchers we would do well not to spend too much time fixating on the numbers. There are many reasons why articles are rejected. The usual one is authors have simply not grasped the aims of the journal and are desperately seeking any publication outlet willing to consider qualitative data

中文翻译：

---

在整个欧洲演出并用英文书写：定性心理学家的双重挑战

早在 2000 年代初期，当 Brendan Gough 和我第一次向出版商提出心理学定性研究 (QRP) 的想法时，我们将其设想为主要在英国的出版物。我们的印象是，在全球讲英语的地区之外，心理学家进行的定性研究相对较少，而且英国是唯一能够维持足够副本以维持季刊运转的欧洲国家。仔细阅读提交的统计数据似乎支持我们的信念——在截至 2019 年的两年中，英国作者提交的文章数量 (n = 61) 几乎与欧洲其他地区的总和 (n = 62) 一样多。然而，在该期刊的前 10 年（2004-2013 年），前者的数字是后者的两倍多。当然，这并不能告诉我们太多。可能是英国心理学中的定性研究正在减少，或者有更多的媒体接受英国作者的定性文章。值得注意的是，录取率发生了变化。过去两年提交的来自英国的文章被接受的可能性要大得多（46%，而上一时期为 28%；22% 是整体接受率）。或许英国作者终于想出什么样的文章可以寄给我们？来自欧洲大陆国家的提交显示出惊人的一致性。我们每年大约收到一篇来自丹麦的文章，其中超过一半的文章已经发表（58%）。我们只收到了四篇来自荷兰的文章，还没有发表一篇。唯一明显的趋势是从斯堪的纳维亚半岛到南欧的轻微波动。在最初的 10 年里，我们大部分来自英国以外的欧洲提交的作品来自瑞典 (10) 和挪威 (9)。现在发送最多的是西班牙和意大利。在意大利的情况下，这可能反映了我们发表了几篇文章的时期，但尽管向我们发送了 16 篇文章，但我们没有发表任何来自西班牙的文章。当然，作为定性研究人员，我们最好不要花太多时间关注数字。文章被拒绝的原因有很多。通常的情况是作者根本没有掌握期刊的目标，正在拼命寻找愿意考虑定性数据的出版渠道 但是尽管我们总共向我们发送了 16 封邮件，但我们未能发布任何来自西班牙的邮件。当然，作为定性研究人员，我们最好不要花太多时间关注数字。文章被拒绝的原因有很多。通常的情况是作者根本没有掌握期刊的目标，正在拼命寻找愿意考虑定性数据的出版渠道 但是尽管我们总共向我们发送了 16 封邮件，但我们未能发布任何来自西班牙的邮件。当然，作为定性研究人员，我们最好不要花太多时间关注数字。文章被拒绝的原因有很多。通常的情况是作者根本没有掌握期刊的目标，正在拼命寻找愿意考虑定性数据的出版渠道