2017;114(48):1270813. Our results show that we cannot say that there is a significant difference between authors from prestigious institutions and authors from less prestigious institutions for DBPR-accepted manuscripts. v)ic#L7p[ q^$;lmP)! Each journal is able to customize the wording of the status terms, but the same status phases apply to all journals using Editorial Manager. This is public, and permanent. All communication from submission to publication will be with the corresponding author. That is, authors that feel more vulnerable to implicit bias against the prestige of their institutional affiliation or their country tend to choose DBPR to prevent such bias playing a role in the editorial decision. 0000002247 00000 n 50decision sent to authorwaiting for revisionFigure 2 Article proofs sent to author 4. Search. In order to assign a measure of institutional prestige to each manuscript, we used the 2016/2017 Times Higher Education rankings (THE [20]) and normalised the institution names using the GRID API. Moreover, DBPR manuscripts are less likely to be successful than SBPR manuscripts at both the decision stages considered (Tables5 and 10), but because of the above limitations, our analysis could not disentangle the effects of these factors: bias (from editors and reviewers) towards various author characteristics, bias (from editors and reviewers) towards the review model, and quality of the manuscripts. Springer is committed to your publishing success: If your research is of good quality, then it may be suitable for another journal. Table14 shows acceptance rate by institution group, regardless of review type. 2nd ed. In WeWork, the Delaware Court of Chancery found that the use of Sprint email accounts by Sprint employees doing WeWork-related work for SoftBank caused the communications between SoftBank and those individuals to lose the privilege that might otherwise have attached to them. Decision-making: Theory and practic e 145. how to pronounce dandelion witcher. To obtain Real Cuban Link Chain For Sale Near Mumbai, Maharashtra, To place the results below within the right context, we point out that this study suffered from a key limitation, namely that we did not have an independent measure of quality for the manuscript or a controlled experiment in which the same manuscript is reviewed under both peer review models. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.4.715. Both authors designed the study and contributed equally to the Results section. We also performed logistic regression modelling with author update, out-to-review, and acceptance as response, and journal tier, author gender, author country, and institution as predictors. In order to detect any bias towards institutional prestige, we referred to a dataset containing 20,706 records, which includes OTR papers that were either rejected or accepted, as well as transfers. This is because authors cannot modify their choice of review model at the transfer stage, and thus transfers cannot contribute to the uptake analysis. We employed hypothesis testing techniques to test various hypotheses against the data. EDR proposed the study and provided the data on manuscript submissions and the gender data from Gender API. 9. national association of state directors of developmental disabilities service, how many years did juan carlos serve as king. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. If you still have questions about what In Review can do for you or how it works, read our FAQ. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts In these scenarios, crowd wisdom peaks early then becomes less accurate as more individuals become involved, explained senior author Iain Couzin, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology. Needs Approval or Revision Needs Approval. The Editor has made a decision and requested you revise the submission. 2017-07-13 11:21. Cohen-Friendly association plot for Table5. The submission process has completed with either an Accept or Reject decision. nature~. In any 6-month period, manuscripts can be under editorial assessment . We had gender information for 50,533 corresponding authors and found no statistically significant difference in the distribution of peer review model between males and females (p value=0.6179). captcha. Table7 shows the results; for the sake of completeness, Table7 includes the number and percentages of rejected vs. out-to-review manuscripts for which the gender of the corresponding author was NA. 0000003551 00000 n https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings. We then studied the manuscripts editorial outcome in relation to review model and authors characteristics. If you have submitted your manuscript to an Editorial Manager journal but you have not yet received a final decision, you can check its status online. manuscripts originally submitted to a journal and subsequently transferred to another journal which was deemed a better fit by the editor. May 2022 lewmar 185tt bow thruster parts . There are several factors that influence the time taken for review, most notably availability of article referees. We considered using citations as a proxy for the quality of published papers; however, this would have limited the dataset to the small number of published articles that have had time to accrue citations, given the low acceptance rate of the journals considered, and the fact that the dataset is recent in relation to when DBPR was introduced at the Nature journals. Springer Nature. Chung KC, Shauver MJ, Malay S, Zhong L, Weinstein A, Rohrich RJ. Any conclusive statement about the efficacy of DBPR would have to wait until such control can be implemented or more data collected. . 1991;81(5):104167. Part of Decisions are to be made by consensus. Comment on/see emerging science in full HTMLin both phone and desktop-friendly sizes, Find new discoveries with fully-indexed search, Gain insight into the peer review pipeline at participating journals, Authors original submitted version and all versions are released in real time as peer review progresses. 2002;17(8):34950. This first-of-its-kindoption, called In Review, brought to you by our partners at Research Square, makes it easy to share a preprint of your manuscript on the Research Square platform andgives you real time updates onyour manuscripts progress through peer review. 0000013573 00000 n In Review. Nevertheless, the available data allowed us to draw conclusions on the uptake of the review models, as we detail below. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0049-z, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0049-z. Nature Communications is incorporating transparent peer review into the journal on a permanent basis, following a successful ten-month trial. Transfer of papers between Cell Press journals and Molecular Plant. New submissions that remain Incomplete more than 90 days will be removed. To ascertain whether indeed any referee bias is present, we studied the acceptance rate by gender and review type. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of Springer Nature. This may be due to editor bias towards the review model, to a quality effect (authors within each institution group choose to submit their best studies under SBPR), or both. The UC's agreement with Springer Nature is a three-year-plus agreement, through 2023, that increases both UC's access to Springer Nature journals and support for the open access publication of UC research. We employed descriptive statistics for data exploration, and we tested our hypotheses using Pearsons chi-square and binomial tests. In Review clearly links your manuscript to the journal reviewing it, while its in review. We observed that DBPR is chosen more often by authors submitting to higher impact journals within the Nature portfolio, by authors from specific countries (India and China in particular, among countries with the highest submission rates), and by authors from less prestigious institutions. Nature . The results were significant for all pairs: group 1 vs. group 2 (2=15.961, df=1, p value <0.001); group 2 vs. group 3 (2=7.1264, df=1, p value=0.0227); and group 1 vs. group 3 (2=37.304, df=1, p value <0.001). The area under the receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve is 0.65. We note here that, in recent years, trends in scholarly publishing have emerged that strongly propose transparent, or open, peer review as a model that could potentially improve the quality and robustness of the peer review process [18]. A 3D accelerometer device and host-board (i.e., sensor node) were embedded in a case . There . However, we did not achieve a good fit, as per the binned plot of residuals against expected values, and the C-index (used to assess the discriminatory ability of standard logistic models) is 0.68, so well below the threshold of 0.8 for good fit. Although each journal published by Cell Press is editorially independent, we have been using Editorial Manager, a manuscript tracking system that allows authors to transfer manuscripts along with any review comments they may have between Molecular Plant and Plant Communications.Should you have any questions about the . For example, a report showed that 34% of 880 manuscripts submitted to two radiology journals contained information that would either potentially or definitely reveal the identities of the authors or their institution [2]. The decision is sent to the author. Finally, we investigated the uptake of the peer review models by country of the corresponding author for the entire portfolio, using data on all of the 106,373 manuscripts. Accepted articles are automatically sent to the production department once the Editor has made a final decision of 'Accept'. As a consequence, we are unable to distinguish bias towards author characteristics or the review model from any quality effect, and thus, we cannot draw definitive conclusions on the efficacy of DBPR in addressing bias. Some research has not found conclusive results [6, 7], demonstrating the need for further large-scale systematic analyses spanning over journals across the disciplinary spectrum. There is not yet sufficient data to conclude which form of peer reviewtransparent or double-blindis the most conducive to rigorous and unbiased science reporting. This status will remain until an Editor takes an action in the system to change the status, usually inviting reviewers. Hb```f``5g`c`} 6Pc. 2012;114(2):50019. Article Tracking will guide you through the stages from the moment your article has been submitted until it is published. Brief definitions for each of the metrics used to measure the influence of our journals are included below the journal metrics. We also analysed the OTR rates by gender of the corresponding author, regardless of review type. 'Completed - Accept'. Table3 shows the distribution of DBPR and SBPR in the three gender categories. sean penn parkinson's disease 2021. korttidsminne test siffror; lng eller kort pipa hagel. EDR is employed by Macmillan Publishers Ltd, which publishes the Nature-branded journals. How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380? We did not find a significant association between OTR and gender (Pearsons chi-square test results: 2=0.015641, df=1, p value=0.9005). Submission to Accept: the median time (in days) from the published submission date to the final editorial acceptance date. We understand that you have not received any journal email. eLife. In the case of transfers, the author cannot change the review type compared to the original submission, and therefore, we excluded the 22,081 (17%) transferred manuscripts from the analysis of author uptake. (major revision)6 (revision)3 (Covid-19) 3. Click here to download our quick reference guide to journal metrics. Finally, we associated each author with a gender label (male/female) by using the Gender API service [21]. In order to test whether the proportions in different groups were the same, we used the test of equal proportions in R (command prop.test). We are a world leading research, educational and professional publisher. For this analysis, we included direct submissions as well as transferred manuscripts, because the editorial criteria vary by journal and a manuscript rejected by one journal and transferred to another may then be sent out to review.
Sands Of Salzaar Companions,
Long Day's Journey Into Night Monologue,
Articles D