Between 1993 and 2010, two French journals (Aster and Didaskalia) coming from different backgrounds but belonging to the same institution used to publish papers on research in science and technology education. The merging of these journals made it necessary for them to compare the different reviewing procedures used by each. This merging occurred at a time when research is becoming increasingly international which partly determines some of the reviewing procedure choices. In order for a francophone international journal to survive, it needs to take this internationalization into account in a reasoned manner. The author of this article, as a chief editor of "RDST" ("Recherches en Didactique des Sciences et des Technologies")--the journal resulting from the merging--taking part in this merger, analyses the social, cultural and pragmatic determinants which impacted the choices made in reviewing procedures. This paper describes how these diversity of factors leads us to drop the idea of a standard reviewing procedure which would be valid for all journals.