decision sent to author nature communications
Journal-integrated preprint sharing fromSpringer Nature and Research Square, Share your preprint and trackyour manuscripts review progress with ourIn Review service. 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. (major revision)6 (revision)3 (Covid-19) 3. 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. If you have previously submitted a paper to a Nature Portfolio journal and would like an update on the status of your submission, please login to the manuscript tracking account for the . Finally, editors need to assess these reviews and formulate a decision. 20000 characters with spaces), Research Articles (25000-40000 characters with spaces), . The results of a Pearsons chi-square test of independence are as follows: 2=378.17, degrees of freedom=2, p value <0.001; Cramers V=0.054 and show that authors submitting to more prestigious journals tend to have a slight preference for DBPR compared to SBPR. r/biology I buried a dead rat (killed by delayed rat poison or a neighbor's cat) in an iron barrel with soil on Sep 8. Don't wait too long. 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. In the following analysis, we will refer to the data where the gender field is not NA as the Gender Dataset. The science editor has sole responsibility for the decision to accept or reject a manuscript, and that decision is final. The journal's Editorial team will check the submission and either send back to the author for action, or assign to an Editor. Nature-branded journals publishing primary research introduced DBPR as an optional service in March 2015 in response to authors requests [17]. The aims of this study are to analyse the demographics of corresponding authors choosing double-blind peer review and to identify differences in the editorial outcome of manuscripts depending on their review model. Goldin C, Rouse C. Orchestrating impartiality: the impact of blind auditions on female musicians. All communication from submission to publication will be with the corresponding author. DBPR was introduced in the Nature journals in response to the author communitys wish for a bias-free peer review process. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988. 2nd ed. &@ 5A9BC|2 @So0 My father emptied the thing at an unknown date ruining my spontaneous project, but at least I was able to recover the skull, jaw, spine & ribs. All coauthors must agree to post a preprint and participate inIn Review. The submission remains at this status until you select "Build PDF for Approval". However, we find that a logarithmic-based categorization of this sort would be more representative than a linear-based one. R-CAPTCHA. McGillivray, B., De Ranieri, E. Uptake and outcome of manuscripts in Nature journals by review model and author characteristics. 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. In Review. making DBPR compulsory to accelerate data collection and remove potential bias against the review model. 0000009876 00000 n The original authors are given 10 days to respond. 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. We however included transfers in all other analyses because we considered the analysed items as combinations of three attributes: paper, corresponding author, and journal to which the paper was submitted. 0000001795 00000 n 0000011063 00000 n 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. Across the three institution groups, SBPR papers are more likely to be sent to review. In your 'Author Main Menu' manuscripts appear in different folders as they pass through phases in the editorial process: The submission is waiting for you to complete the submission (or revision) process. All authors are encouraged to update their demographic and expertise information during the confirmation step. For further information, please contact Research Square at info@researchsquare.com. The target number of required reviews has been completed, and the Handling Editor is considering the reviews. Finally, we investigated the outcome of post-review decisions as a function of peer review model and characteristics of the corresponding author. ISSN 2041-1723 (online). And here is a list of journals currently onIn Review. 9. We only considered 83,256 (out of the 106,373) manuscripts for which the gender assigned to the corresponding authors name by Gender API had a confidence score of at least 80 and the gender was either male or female (the Gender Dataset, excluding transfers). . Submission to first editorial decision - 8, Submission to first post-review decision - 46. Hb```f``5g`c`} 6Pc. Nature. The results on author uptake show that DBPR is chosen more frequently by authors that submit to higher impact journals within the portfolio, by authors from certain countries, and by authors from less prestigious institutions. In order to test whether two variables were independent, we used Pearsons chi-square test of independence and referred to the classification in [21] to define the strength of association. If you have previously submitted a paper to a Nature Portfolio journal and would like an update on the status of your submission, please login to the manuscript tracking account for the corresponding journal. A test for equality of proportions for groups 1 and 2 for DBPR papers showed a non-significant result (2=0.13012, df=1, p value=0.7183), and the same test on group 2 and group 3 for DBPR papers showed a significant result (2=40.898, df=1, p value <0.001). Either behaviour may apply to different demographics of authors. If you require assistance, please scroll down and use one of the contact options to get in touch. So, in October 2018, we added a new option for you when you submit to select Springer Nature journals. Decision sent to author NZip for reviewers We excluded data where the gender was not assigned to either male or female. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. https://www.grid.ac. Yes After making the decision, it is necessary to notify the authors. We found that manuscripts submitted under DBPR are less likely to be sent to review and accepted than those submitted under SBPR. This decision is the sole responsibility of the . Based on the Nature Photonics Review Speed Feedback System, it takes authors 11.4 days to get the first editorial decision. Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. Please try your request again later. This is known as a rescinding. 0000003551 00000 n 9.3 weeks. Table2 displays the uptake by journal group and shows that the review model distribution changes as a function of the journal tier, with the proportion of double-blind papers decreasing for tiers with comparatively higher perceived prestige. Our commitment to early sharing and transparency in peer review inspires us to think about how to help our authors in new ways. 201451 XXXXX@nature.com Final decision for XXXXX. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000001820, Newcombe NS, Bouton ME. 0000014682 00000 n A PDF has been built, either by you or by the editor, that requires your approval to move forward. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. The corresponding author does not need to be the first author . von | Mai 21, 2022 | safello aktie flashback | Mai 21, 2022 | safello aktie flashback The report will be advisory to the editors. 50decision sent to authorwaiting for revisionFigure 2 Article proofs sent to author 4. The Editor has recommended the submission be transferred to another journal, and your response is needed. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The median number of citations received in 2019 for articles published in2017 and 2018. In order to identify the pair(s) giving rise to this difference, we performed a test of equal proportion for each pair and accounted for multiple testing with Bonferroni correction. A Pearsons chi-square test found a significant, but small association between institution group and review type (2=656.95, df=2, p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.106). Any conclusive statement about the efficacy of DBPR would have to wait until such control can be implemented or more data collected. Cohen-Friendly association plot for Table5. We investigated any potential differences in uptake depending on the journal tier. 0000002625 00000 n BMC Med. The EiC may have seen merits in your paper after all (or a fit, if that was the issue). In the following analysis, we will refer to the data for groups 1, 2, and 3 as the Institution Dataset. Similar results are achieved if simpler logistic regression models are considered, such as review type modelled on journal tier and institution and review type modelled on journal tier only. Please enter your feedback to submit this form, Journal Article Publishing Support Center. The corresponding author takes responsibility for the manuscript during the submission, peer review and production process. sean penn parkinson's disease 2021. korttidsminne test siffror; lng eller kort pipa hagel. Hope everybody's doing well. There is a small but significant association between institution group and acceptance (Pearsons chi-square test results: 2=49.651, df=3, p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.049). The present study focusses on the effects of this publisher intervention in the 2years following implementation and can guide others when evaluating the consequences of introducing DBPR to their journals. 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. 0000008637 00000 n 0000013595 00000 n We can conclude that authors from the least prestigious institutions are more likely to choose DBPR compared to authors from the most prestigious institutions and authors from the mid-range institutions. May 2022 lewmar 185tt bow thruster parts Motivation: First decision to send out to review in 3 weeks, but then a very long delay to receiving a final decision. Sorry we couldn't be helpful. This page provides information on peer review performance and citation metrics for Nature Communications. We found a significant result (2=37.76, df=2, p value <0.001). Time: 2023-03-04T15:53:14+00:00. Research Square notifies authors of preprint posting, and sends a link to the author dashboard. First, we calculated the acceptance rate by gender, regardless of review type (Table12). Once a paper is submitted, the journal editors proceed with their assessment of the work and decide whether each manuscript is sent out for review (OTR) to external reviewers. Corresponding author defined. Chung KC, Shauver MJ, Malay S, Zhong L, Weinstein A, Rohrich RJ. As needed, the journal editors may also ask the committee to provide opinions on the policies and procedures of the journals. Each indicates a particular phase of the review process that usually happens in a certain order, however an individual submission can skip a phase, or return back to an earlier phase, depending on Editor actions. 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. For most of our journals the corresponding author can track the article online. Nature Communications was another publishing master stroke for Nature that also took advantage of a new market opportunity. The full model has a pseudo R2 of 0.03, and the binned plot of the models residuals against the expected values also shows a poor fit. 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. Please log in to your personal My Springer Nature profile and click on "Your submissions" to start tracking your articles. 0000009854 00000 n Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 0000005880 00000 n hoi4 what to do when capitulate. Table3 shows the distribution of DBPR and SBPR in the three gender categories. This is because the Nature journals do not collect information on authors gender, and thus, such information can only be retrieved with name-matching algorithms with limited accuracy. Carlsson F, Lfgren , Sterner T. Discrimination in scientific review: a natural field experiment on blind versus non-blind reviews. . ,.,., . Journals can customize the wording of status terms. Masked reviews are not fairer reviews. In the post-review analysis, we found that DBPR papers that are sent to review have an acceptance rate that is significantly lower than that of SBPR papers. trailer << /Size 54 /Info 7 0 R /Root 10 0 R /Prev 92957 /ID[<98e42fa76505e1b5b1796b170b58dfee><8c8134bb7fa785eceed4533362dfb985>] >> startxref 0 %%EOF 10 0 obj << /Type /Catalog /Pages 6 0 R /Metadata 8 0 R /PageLabels 5 0 R >> endobj 52 0 obj << /S 48 /L 155 /Filter /FlateDecode /Length 53 0 R >> stream This means that there is a statistically significant difference between the three groups. Article Tracking will guide you through the stages from the moment your article has been submitted until it is published. Some editors keep a paper for long time, more than 6 months or a year, without a decision and when send them a reminder message they do not reply or sometimes reply for the first time saying that . The full model has a pseudo R2 of 0.06, which means that the model only represents a 6% improvement over simply guessing the most frequent outcome, or in other words, the model is not powerful enough to predict the uptake of DB with high reliability. Note that once completed reviews for your submitted article have been received and are under evaluation by the handling Editor the status may later return to 'Under Review' if additional reviews are sought. 'Submission Transfers Waiting for Author's Approval'. Moreover, the two models do not have to be exclusive;one could think of a DBPR stage followed by full public disclosure of reviewers and editors identities and reports. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The Article Influence Score determines the average influence of a journal's articles over the first five years after publication. We then analysed the uptake by gender for the entire portfolio, as we were interested in finding any gender-related patterns. Tregenza T. Gender bias in the refereeing process? . 85,307,200 Downloads (in 2021) In our case, this analysis was hampered by the lack of an independent measure of quality, by potential confounders such as potential editor bias towards the review model or author characteristics, and by the lack of controlled experiments in which the same paper is reviewed under both SBPR and DBPR, or in which DBPR is compulsory, thus eliminating the effect of bias towards the review model. Papers. 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 the records for which the assigned gender was NA and focussed on a dataset of 17,167 records, of which 2849 (17%) had a female corresponding author and 14,318 (83%) had a male corresponding author. Nature Neuroscience manuscript stage. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The Immediacy Index is the average number of times an article is cited in the year it is published. 0000055535 00000 n More information regarding the release of these data can be found here. 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. Share your preprint and track your manuscript's review progress with our In Review service. Nature Support Solution home Author and Peer Reviewer Support Submission Rejection of your paper / manuscript Modified on: Mon, 26 Jul, 2021 at 6:04 PM Springer is committed to your. These results suggest that the choice of DBPR may be linked with a higher perceived risk of discrimination, with the exception of gender discrimination. BMcG was the major contributor in writing the Background and Methods sections. The gender (male, female, or NA) of the corresponding authors was determined from their first name using a third-party service (Gender API). Cohen J. 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. We inspected the gender assigned via the Gender API, which assigns an accuracy score between 0 and 100 to each record. 0000001245 00000 n For translations into other languages, we recommend using YouTube's translation feature. When the Editors begin to enter a decision it will move the status to 'Decision in Process'. 0000004388 00000 n Results on the uptake are shown in Table5. This can potentially skew our results if, for example, there are differences in the proportion of names that cannot be attributed between genders. California Privacy Statement, If an author believes the decision regarding their manuscript was affected by a publication ethics breach, .