editor decision started nature

The two additional source and target nodes make start and end of the process visible. Answer (1 of 7): Most submissions are rejected by editors without review, and this should be fast - perhaps, two weeks (?). In the subsection above, we have shown for first submitted versions that the drafting of decision letters happens mostly for negative decisions. We were provided with data from an editorial management system by a biomedical publisher. In the last 15years, novel digital infrastructures of different forms and shapes have been established, aiming at supporting communication, dissemination and evaluation of scientific research (Van Noorden, 2014; Taubert, 2016; Blmel, 2021). Events triggered by (columns) and affective to (rows) the different roles assigned. Nature 512, 126-129. Can I ask the editor to publish a withdrawn manuscript after acceptance? round 1""nature nature metabolism. How long time should we wait for editor decision on a manuscript? and SHORT ANSWER. This relates to recent research lines focusing on the stability and transformability of editorial practices by Horbach and Halffman (2020, p.3) arguing that existing editorial practices can be stabilized by infrastructures. Yet, given our limited reconstruction of the event history, we cannot confirm this hypothesis. The institution of scholarly peer review as the main instance for scientific quality assurance appears to be comparably stable since more than three hundred years, despite several technical changes (Reinhart, 2010; Pontille and Torny, 2015; Horbach and Halffman, 2019). Consequently, the analysis shows how much organizational effort goes into what Schendzielorz and Reinhart (2020) have called the administrative parts of the peer review process to which this article pays particular attention. Glonti K., Boutron I., Moher D., Hren D. (2019). We use the perspective of the infrastructure by studying the recorded events it has created as a result of actions by different actors. We found multiple observations for each manuscript with a stage name, a time stamp and two pseudonymized person-identity numbers (hereinafter, person-IDs), in the system originally identifying individual users assigned to it the person who triggered an event and the person affected by an event (judging by the xml-tags assigned to the information). The editorial process as depicted in the patent (from: Plotkin (2009)). These are considered appeals, which, by policy, take second place to consideration of normal submissions. Motivation: Altogether, this was a positive experience. Secondly 2), we intent to gain insights into the ways editorial management systems shape or transform editorial practices, i.e., to explore the ways of how the technology has been implemented in the journal. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frma.2021.747562/full#supplementary-material, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=data.table, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggraph, https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-116609, Manuscript identifier with version indicator, Role of person acting (relative to manuscript). Usually, the times vary from two to six months, but there is no fixed rule. At the same time, they emphasize a power perspective with regard to different degrees of involvement for actors, their role and participant status. A decision to send the paper for review can take longer, but usually within a month (in which case the editors send apologies). [CDATA[// >When should you challenge an editors decision to reject a paper? The actions are attributed with manuscripts they belong to, and points in time when they were carried out, which is why we are able to infer the order of actions, choices at forks and pace of the process. The manuscript and associated materials are checked for quality and completeness by the journals editorial assistant. The figure shows the decisions for the original manuscript version (v0) and resubmitted versions (v1v5). Digital infrastructures such as editorial management systems allow for processing data about the submission, evaluation and decision of manuscripts in novel ways, taking particularly the velocity, role specificity and consistence of the peer review process into account. The infrastructure models the peer review process along the way of submitted (versions of) manuscripts, which enter the system during submission and pass through different stages afterwards. In the light of the transparent review process at this publisher, where editorial decision letters are published alongside accepted papers, this is especially interesting, because decision letters for successful submissions can be expected to have a much larger audience than for non-successful submissions. It has core editorial offices across the United States, continental Europe, and Asia under the international scientific publishing company Springer Nature. editor decision started nature German Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies (DZHW), Berlin, Germany, 2 For this purpose, we use network analysis: the vertices represent the stages and a (directed) edge is drawn from one stage to another when it is directly following in one items history. We aim to compare empirical process generated data with this idealized process provided with the patent, because the processual data reflect local adaptations and uses of these technologies emerging from concrete demands of authors, reviewers and editors in the configurations of a journal (Horbach and Halffman, 2019, p.2), but are at the same time also constrained by the initial definition of roles and processes set up by the developers of the technology (Krger et al., 2021). Reviewers read the manuscript and submit their reports. The data stem from the editorial management system eJournalPress and the focal data used here are the history-information of 14,392 manuscript files referring to 17,109 manuscript versions processed in the years 2011 and 2015 in the infrastructure for four of the publishers journals, which depict the manuscript life cycle from the infrastructures point of view. Please see our guidelines for initial submission to make sure that you provide us with all necessary information at this stage. Additionally, actions were recorded for person-IDs not having a role assigned for the respective manuscript. Is there any regulation for enforcing he editor for appropriate reply about accept or reject? Moreover, the characteristics of both reviewers and editors are explored to a significant extent (Hirschauer, 2010, 73). The edge widths show, how many manuscripts experience the respective evolutionary path. This matched with what we would have expected to happen: there are editorial decisions without peer review, which is also represented by the editorial management system. Lifting the curtain on editorial decisions - Springer Nature Moreover, infrastructures can be seen as structures emerging from situated knowledges, a term coined by Haraway (1988) with regard to people and communities with partial perspectives. To the best of our knowledge, our analysis is one of the very few quantitative analyses of these processes. You should hear back within a week or two. Our original resources for authors and journals will help you become an expert in academic publishing. Subscribe and get curated content that will give impetus to your research paper. Nature Full disclosure: Editage Insights is a product of Editage, a global provider of world-class scientific communication solutions. For example, the event Preliminary Manuscript Data submitted happens for almost all manuscripts, which is why it does not help us to distinguish manuscript lifecycles in a meaningful way. To identify important passage points in the network, we chose node degree centrality with respect to edge multiplicity. //-->MDPI Empirically, a panoply of orders occur in the manuscript histories, which means that for most of the stages, it is not predetermined in the systems implementation what happens next in the process. I submitted a paper in a journal. It's showing under consideration for Receive industry news, advice from editors & gallerists, exclusive deadlines, entry to the best images occasions and more on a weekly basis. On occasion, particularly if the editors feel that additional technical expertise is needed to make a decision, they may obtain advice from additional reviewers. Editorial criteria and processes | Nature [CDATA[// >