This is public, and permanent. It's simple! 2012;114(2):50019. Nature. We investigated the proportion of OTR papers (OTR rate) under both peer review models to see if there were any differences related to gender or institution. There is a tiny but significant association between institution group and acceptance, which means that authors from less prestigious institutions tend to be rejected more than authors from more prestigious institutions, regardless of review type. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings. Editorial Manager displays status terms as described in the table below. An analysis of the journal Behavioral Ecology, which switched to DBPR in 2001, found a significant interaction between gender and time, reflecting the higher number of female authors after 2001, but no significant interaction between gender and review type [11]. . In the following analysis, we will refer to the data for groups 1, 2, and 3 as the Institution Dataset. So, in October 2018, we added a new option for you when you submit to select Springer Nature journals. In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles BMC Med. 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. . A test for equality of proportions for groups 1 and 2 for SBPR papers returned a significant difference (2=331.62, df=1, p value <0.001); the same test for group 2 and group 3 for SBPR papers also returned a significant difference (2=464.86, df=1, p value <0.001). In order to see whether the final decision outcome could be accurately predicted based on author and journal characteristics, we attempted to fit logistic regression models to the data. Res Integr Peer Rev 3, 5 (2018). Article Tracking will guide you through the stages from the moment your article has been submitted until it is published. authors opting for DBPR should not post on preprint archives). n/a. When analysing data for the entire portfolio, we only included direct submissions (106,373) and we excluded manuscripts that were rejected by one journal and then transferred to another. The process was on par with other journal experiences, but I do not appreciate the inconsistency between what the editor at Nature Medicine told me when transferring to Nature Comms, and the final evaluation at Nature Comms. 0000001589 00000 n Each journal is able to customize the wording of the status terms, but the same status phases apply to all journals using Editorial Manager. . 0000002034 00000 n Nature 2015;518(7539):274. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/518274b. The Editors have begun a decision in the system. 15 days You can make one of the following decisions: Accept, Revise or Reject. You can see an example in the article above. The meaning of 'reject & resubmit' is to indicate that in principle the editor likes the topic for their journal, but the current paper is . However, we recommend you check the Junk/ Spam folder in your mailbox to see if the journal's decision letter is present. Helmer M, Schottdorf M, Neef A, Battaglia D. Research: gender bias in scholarly peer review. Nature-branded journals publishing primary research introduced DBPR as an optional service in March 2015 in response to authors requests [17]. 0000013573 00000 n Submission to Accept: the median time (in days) from the published submission date to the final editorial acceptance date. BMcG was the major contributor in writing the Background and Methods sections. Please try your request again later. All authors are encouraged to update their demographic and expertise information during the confirmation step. When analysing uptake data by journal tier, we have included both direct submissions and transfers incoming to each journal group, for a total of 128,457 manuscripts that were submitted to one of the 25 Nature-branded journals. The study was designed to analyse the manuscripts submitted to Nature-branded journals publishing primary research between March 2015 (when the Nature-branded primary research journals introduced DBPR as an opt-in service) and February 2017. We employed hypothesis testing techniques to test various hypotheses against the data. We found a small but significant association between journal tier and review type. For the sake of completeness, Table8 includes the number and percentages of rejected vs. out-to-review manuscripts for which the gender of the corresponding author was male, female, or NA. At Nature Biomedical Engineering, we collect some numbers into a 'journal dashboard': These numbers are running statistics over 6-month intervals (to smooth out fluctuations in the numbers*). Results on the uptake are shown in Table5. When you submit your article through the manuscript submission systemyou will get the chance to opt in toIn Review. All coauthors must agree to post a preprint and participate inIn Review. No, Modified on: Mon, 26 Jul, 2021 at 6:04 PM. Bruce R, Chauvin A, Trinquart L, Ravaud P, Boutron I. If you choose to opt in, your article will undergo some basic quality controlchecks before being sent to theIn Reviewplatform. We divided the journals in three tiers: (i) the flagship interdisciplinary journal (Nature), (ii) the discipline-specific sister journals (Nature Astronomy, Nature Biomedical Engineering, Nature Biotechnology, Nature Cell Biology, Nature Chemical Biology, Nature Chemistry, Nature Climate Change, Nature Ecology & Evolution, Nature Energy, Nature Genetics, Nature Geoscience, Nature Human Behaviour, Nature Immunology, Nature Materials, Nature Medicine, Nature Methods, Nature Microbiology, Nature Nanotechnology, Nature Neuroscience, Nature Photonics, Nature Physics, Nature Plants, Nature Structural & Molecular Biology), and (iii) the open-access interdisciplinary title (Nature Communications). Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. We also analysed the OTR rates by gender of the corresponding author, regardless of review type. . Please note that this definition is different from that of the corresponding author(s) as stated on published articles and who are the author(s) responsible for correspondence with readers. Regarding gender bias, a study showed that blinding interviewees in orchestra interviews led to more females being hired [8]. We then mapped the normalised institution names from our dataset to the normalised institution names of the THE rankings via a Python script. The Editors may take time to discuss the reviews and may invite more reviewers or assign another editor, returning the submission to an earlier status. Timely attention to proofs will ensure the article is slated for the next possible issue. Submission to first editorial decision: the median time (in days) from when a submission is received to when a first editorial decision about whether the paper was sent out for formal review or not is sent to the authors. v)ic#L7p[ q^$;lmP)! 0000012294 00000 n We also found that manuscripts from female authors or authors from less prestigious institutions are accepted with a lower rate than those from male authors or more prestigious institutions, respectively. 9.3 weeks. PLOS ONE. 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). 2.3 Procedures Communications Arising submissions that meet Nature's initial selection criteria are sent to the authors of the original paper for a response, and the exchange to independent referees. sean penn parkinson's disease 2021. korttidsminne test siffror; lng eller kort pipa hagel. 2006;81(5):705. 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. Because of the small size of the data set for accepted papers and of the lack of an independent measure for the quality of the manuscripts, we could not draw firm conclusions on the existence of implicit bias and on the effectiveness of DBPR in reducing or removing it. Am Econ Rev. For some journals, the status may include the decision term e.g. Nature CommunicationsNatureNature CommunicationsPeer-review Nature Communicationstransparent peer-reviewget Nature Communicationsget50% Nature Communicaitons Table6 shows the counts and proportions of manuscripts that were sent out for review or rejected by the editors as a function of peer review model. Download MP3 / 387 KB. Back to top. The proportion of authors choosing double-blind changes as a function of the institution group, with higher ranking groups having a higher proportion of single-blind manuscripts (Table4). Submissions not complying with policy and guidelines receive an immediate (administrative) reject and are not forwarded to the review process (IEEE PSPB Operation Manual, 8.2.2.3) Authors are required to ensure before submission that their manuscripts are in full compliance with the magazine's submission policy and guidelines as outlined below. Corresponding author defined. In the context of scientific literature, an analysis of 2680 manuscripts from seven journals found no overall difference in the acceptance rates of papers according to gender, while at the same time reporting a strong effect of number of authors and country of affiliation on manuscripts acceptance rates [9]. 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. The underlying research question that drove this study is to assess whether DBPR is effective in removing or reducing implicit reviewer bias in peer review. What happens after my manuscript is accepted? In Review. volume3, Articlenumber:5 (2018) Several Nature journals (see list below) follow a transparent peer review system, publishing details about the peer review process as part of the publication (including the reviewer comments to. Any correspondence, queries or additional requests for information on the Manuscript Submission process should be sent to the Natural Product Communications editorial office as follows: [email protected], 614-786-1970. %PDF-1.3 % we could have chosen a different distribution of institutions among the four categories, and will likely have an impact on the uptake of DBPR across the institutional prestige spectrum. How does the Article Transfer Service work for authors? Data includes 128,454 manuscripts received between March 2015 and February 2017 by 25 Nature-branded journals. Double-blind peer review (DBPR) has been proposed as a means to avoid implicit bias from peer reviewers against characteristics of authors such as gender, country of origin, or institution. We excluded papers for which the post-review outcome was a revision and papers which were still under review; thus, the dataset for this analysis comprises 20,706 records of which 8934 were accepted and 11,772 were rejected. 0000007420 00000 n Here, we define the corresponding author as the author who is responsible for managing the submission process on the manuscript tracking system and for all correspondence with the editorial office prior to publication. eLife. 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]. On this page you will find a suite of citation-based metrics for Nature Communications which provides an overview of this journal. Across the three institution groups, SBPR papers are more likely to be sent to review. Are there differences related to gender or institution within the same review model? Concerning the institutions, we defined four categories according to their THE ranks and used these as a proxy for prestige: category 1 includes institutions with THE rank between 1 and 10 (corresponding to 7167 manuscripts, 6% of all manuscripts), category 2 is for THE ranks between 11 and 100 (25,345 manuscripts, 20% of all manuscripts), category 3 for THE ranks above 100 (38,772 manuscripts, 30% of all manuscripts), and category 4 for non-ranked institutions (57,170 manuscripts, or 45% of all manuscripts). 9 0 obj << /Linearized 1 /O 11 /H [ 1335 254 ] /L 93263 /E 83910 /N 2 /T 92966 >> endobj xref 9 45 0000000016 00000 n " Decision Summary" editordecision. We investigated the question of whether, out of the papers that go to review, manuscripts by female corresponding authors are more likely to be accepted than those with male corresponding authors under DBPR and SBPR. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 0000006193 00000 n 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. Authors will get real time updates on their manuscripts progress through peer review in the private author dashboard. This status will remain until an Editor takes an action in the system to change the status, usually inviting reviewers. Each review is due in ten days, and many of them do arrive in two weeks. statement and Journal Issue available online . The target number of required reviews has been completed, and the Handling Editor is considering the reviews. New submissions that remain Incomplete more than 90 days will be removed. Decisions are to be made by consensus. The WeWork Decision. 0000004437 00000 n You have completed the submission and approval steps, and the article has been submitted to the journal. For other authors characteristics, such as institutional prestige, a quality factor is more likely than for gender: it is not unthinkable to assume that on average manuscripts from more prestigious institutions, which tend to have more resources, are of a higher quality than those from institutions with lower prestige and fewer means. We did not observe gender-related differences in uptake. 2016;1(2):1637.
Dinosaur Deck Yugioh 2021, Deadzone Classic Kill All Script, Articles D