decision sent to author nature communications

The author is usually given a deadline of a few weeks to a couple of months depending on the nature of revisions and the field of study. 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. What does the status of my submission mean in Editorial Manager? We focus on the Nature journals as that portfolio covers a wide range of disciplines in the natural sciences and biomedical research, and thus, it gives us an opportunity to identify trends beyond discipline-specific patterns. How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380?, It was on December 21, 1968, that Apollo 8 launched from Cape Kennedy, in Florida, sending US astronauts Frank Borman, James Lovell Jr and William Anders on the world's . I am not a robot. by | May 28, 2022 | vga white light on asus motherboard | anskan om utbyte av utlndskt krkort | May 28, 2022 | vga white light on asus motherboard | anskan om utbyte av utlndskt krkort Correct the online article. Hathaway High School Staff, For Coupons, Giveaways, and Free Games to play with your family, distance between underground pull boxes fiber optic cable, richest instagram influencers non celebrity, big spring correctional center inmate search, rachael newsham and dan cohen relationship, giorno giovanna you will never reach the truth japanese, 34 eye opening photos of the great depression, Real Cuban Link Chain For Sale Near Mumbai, Maharashtra. Let us suggest an alternative journal within our esteemed publishing portfolio for resubmitting your manuscript (and any reviewer comments) for fast, effortless publication. This work was supported by The Alan Turing Institute under the EPSRC grant EP/N510129/1. We first analysed the demographics of corresponding authors that choose DBPR by journal group, gender, country, and institution group. Any conclusive statement about the efficacy of DBPR would have to wait until such control can be implemented or more data collected. The corresponding author takes responsibility for the manuscript during the submission, peer review and production process. In the following analysis, we will refer to the data where the gender field is not NA as the Gender Dataset. EDR is employed by Macmillan Publishers Ltd, which publishes the Nature-branded journals. . Tulare Ca Obituaries, Which proportions of papers are accepted for publication under SBPR and DBPR? Since the models showed a bad fit to the data according to accepted diagnostics criteria, further interpretation of the models is not warranted. These reviewers then need sufficient time to conduct a thorough review on your manuscript. Our aim was to understand the demographics of author uptake and infer the presence of any potential implicit bias towards gender, country, or institutional prestige in relation to the corresponding author. This decision is taken solely by the editors, who are aware of the chosen peer review model as well as all author information. Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review. 0000009854 00000 n The available data cannot tell us if other factors, such as the quality of the work, play a role in the choice of the review model. 'Submission Transfers Waiting for Author's Approval'. It is calculated by multiplying the Eigenfactor Score by 0.01 and dividing by the number of articles in the journal, normalized as a fraction of all articles in all publications. Journal-integrated preprint sharing from Springer Nature and Research Square. 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. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. 201451 XXXXX@nature.com Final decision for XXXXX. 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). Watch the Checking the status of your submission video for more information. References from one article in a journal to another article from the same journal are removed, so that Eigenfactor Scores are not influenced by journal self-citation. Survey on open peer review: attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers. 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. (Nature Portfolio Data), Nature Communications (Nat Commun) 0000004437 00000 n 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. 8. nature1. "Editor decision started" means that the editor is actively reading the manuscript. All coauthors must agree to post a preprint and participate inIn Review. Nature Communications Q&A - Cameronneylon.net Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of Springer Nature. The submission remains at this status until you select "Build PDF for Approval". So, in October 2018, we added a new option for you when you submit to select Springer Nature journals. Third review was never returned so decision was at least partly based on two reviews from the same discipline. We discuss the limitations of the study in more detail in the Discussion section. If you have no email from the journal and have already checked the spam folder of your mailbox, you may check if the submission . 85,307,200 Downloads (in 2021) So, in October 2018, we added a new . von | Mai 21, 2022 | safello aktie flashback | Mai 21, 2022 | safello aktie flashback The report will be advisory to the editors. Renee Wever. Nature Communications is incorporating transparent peer review into the journal on a permanent basis, following a successful ten-month trial. BMcG was the major contributor in writing the Background and Methods sections. Are you sure you do not want to provide feedback? As a co-author, i saw recently that our paper switched from status. Article I submitted to Nature Neuroscience about 9 days ago and it's been "under consideration" for about a week. 2019. Data are collected annually for full calendar years. Submission to first post-review decision: for manuscripts that are sent to external reviewers, the median time (in days) taken from when a submission is received to when an editorial decision post-review is sent to the authors. Connect with us on LinkedIn and stay up to date with news and development. Papers. Decision Summary. Yes 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. We inspected the gender assigned via the Gender API, which assigns an accuracy score between 0 and 100 to each record. A decision to send the paper for review can take longer, but usually within a month (in which case the editors send apologies). 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. Either behaviour may apply to different demographics of authors. Regarding institutional bias, a report of a controlled experiment found that SBPR reviewers are more likely than DBPR reviewers to accept manuscripts from famous authors and high-ranked institutions [15], while another report found that authors at top-ranked universities are unaffected by different reviewing methods [16]. Often commercial sensors do not provide researchers with sufficient raw and open data; therefore, the aim of this study was to develop an open and customizable system to classify cattle behaviors. Each review is due in ten days, and many of them do arrive in two weeks. Here to foster information exchange with the library community. All communication from submission to publication will be with the corresponding author. 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). By accepting all cookies, you agree to our use of cookies to deliver and maintain our services and site, improve the quality of Reddit, personalize Reddit content and advertising, and measure the effectiveness of advertising. This result does not change significantly if we focus on the three institution groups we defined (high-, medium-, and low-prestige), thus excluding the fourth group for which no THE rank was found (Pearsons chi-square test results: 2=49.405, df=2, p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.064), which means that authors from less prestigious institutions tend to be rejected more than authors from more prestigious institutions, regardless of review type. We found a small but significant association between journal tier and review type (p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.054, df=2). This is a statistically significant result, with a small effect size; the results of Pearsons chi-square test of independence are as follows: 2=1533.9, df=2, p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.147. Scand J Econ. 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. When the decision is finalized, you will receive a direct email with the overall editorial decision, Editor and/or reviewer comments, and further instructions. Our commitment to early sharing and transparency in peer review inspires us to think about how to help our authors in new ways. Help us to improve this site, send feedback. This might be due to referee bias against review model, or to a lower quality of DBPR papers, or both. Answer: From the description of the status change of the submission, it seems the manuscript did not pass the formatting check by the editorial staff and required corrections from the author. What does the status of my submission mean in Editorial Manager? - Elsevier Timely attention to proofs will ensure the article is slated for the next possible issue. 0000047805 00000 n 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. Finally, editors need to assess these reviews and formulate a decision. Here, we included data on direct submissions and transfers (101,209 submissions). Visit our main website for more information. Manage cookies/Do not sell my data we use in the preference centre. 0000055535 00000 n bounded rationality . 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. 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 . Article Tracking will guide you through the stages from the moment your article has been submitted until it is published. Authors will be able to track peer review on their private author dashboard. 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. We employed a Wald test to evaluate the statistical significance of each coefficient in the model by testing the hypothesis that the coefficient of an independent variable in the model is significantly different from zero. nature~. 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. . Data includes 128,454 manuscripts received between March 2015 and February 2017 by 25 Nature-branded journals. Perspect Psychol Sci. Until this is done, the decision can be changed. Cookies policy. Webb TJ, OHara B, Freckleton RP. 0000001795 00000 n These records are excluded from the analysis, resulting in a dataset of 128,454 records, of which 20,406 (16%) were submitted to Nature, 65,234 (51%) to the 23 sister journals, and 42,814 (33%) to Nature Communications. Locate submission instructions for a Springer journal, Submit a manuscript with your ORCID number, Submit a Nature Portfolio manuscript for Open Access publishing, Submit multimedia files to be published online with your article. Vintage Cardboard Christmas Decorations, Brief definitions for each of the metrics used to measure the influence of our journals are included below the journal metrics. Results on the uptake are shown in Table5. We have analysed a large dataset of submissions to 25 Nature journals over a period of 2years by review model and in dependence of characteristics of the corresponding author. 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. The author can request that the deadline be extended by writing to the editor in advance. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Incidence and nature of unblinding by authors: our experience at two radiology journals with double-blinded peer review policies. Accepted articles are automatically sent to the production department once the Editor has made a final decision of 'Accept'. The science editor has sole responsibility for the decision to accept or reject a manuscript, and that decision is final. The results of a Pearsons chi-square test of independence show a small effect size (2=138.77, df=1, p value <0.001; Cramers V=0.082). Finally, we associated each author with a gender label (male/female) by using the Gender API service [21]. Brown RJC. We would like to thank Michelle Samarasinghe for the help in collecting the data from the manuscript tracking system and Sowmya Swaminathan for the comments on the study and feedback on the manuscript draft. Because the median is not subject to the . Search. If we compare male authors and female authors acceptance rates for SBPR papers (44 vs. 46%), we find that there is not a significant difference in female authors and male authors for SBPR-accepted manuscripts (results of two-sample test for equality of proportions with continuity correction test: 2=3.6388, df=1, p value=0.05645). Add a footnote to the article displaying the electronic link to the correction notice. We believe that Impact Factor is just one of a number of metrics that can be used to evaluate a journal, and a small number of highly cited papers can have a disproportionate effect on the mean number of citations per paper. Nature. If you want to find out more about when to expect a decision from the Editor, click here. The result was a p value below 0.05, which shows that removing any of the predictors would harm the fit of the best model. Thus, we cannot draw conclusions on any editor bias. 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]. 3. level 1. 0000014682 00000 n In Review. Research Integrity and Peer Review We also analysed the OTR rates by gender of the corresponding author, regardless of review type. 0000012316 00000 n Editors need to identify, invite and get (often two or more) reviewers to agree to review. Just select the In Review option when you submit your next article to one of the participating journals. Because the median is not subject to the distortions from outliers, we have developed and provided the 2-year Median, derived from Web of Science data and defined as the median number of citations received in 2021for articles published in 2019and 2020. Decision-making: Theory and practic e 145. how to pronounce dandelion witcher. Nature. GRID - Global Research Identifier Database. On this page you will find a suite of citation-based metrics for Nature Communications which provides an overview of this journal. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The 5-year journal Impact Factor, available from 2007 onward, is the average number of times articles from the journal published in the past five years have been cited in the JCR year. 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. After manually checking a sample of gender assignments and their scores, we kept the gender returned by Gender API where the accuracy was at least 80 and assigned a value NA otherwise. The post-review outcome of papers as a function of the institution group and review model (Table15) showed that manuscripts from less prestigious institutions are accepted at a lower rate than those from more prestigious ones, even under DBPR; however, due to the small numbers of papers at this stage, the results are not statistically significant. Example: Blood Cancer Journal: Go to the 'Publish with us' drop down menu: Click on 'Submit manuscript' in order to be directed to that journal's manuscript tracking system: For the status of your submission to Scientific Reports,go to the Scientific Reports contact webpage for email addresses to determine which one best fits your requirements. 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 The Nature Portfolio Bioengineering Community is a community blog for readers and authors of Nature Research journals, including Nature Biomedical Engineering, Nature Biotechnology, Nature . https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.4.715. 0000011063 00000 n Updates appear on the public peer review timeline as the manuscript progresses through peer review* (*Not available on Nature-branded journals.). Finally, we investigated the outcome of post-review decisions as a function of peer review model and characteristics of the corresponding author. Are there differences related to gender or institution within the same review model? I submitted a paper in a journal. It's showing under consideration for ,.,., . We excluded data where the gender was not assigned to either male or female. Authors might choose SBPR when submitting their best work as they are proud of it and may opt for DBPR for work of lower quality, or, the opposite could be true, that is, authors might prefer to submit their best work as DBPR to give it a fairer chance against implicit bias. The data that support the findings of this study are available from Springer Nature but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. This status will remain until you begin the process of submitting your revision. 2006;6:12747. Median values and the graphed interval (minimum and maximum values), are indicated. 0000004174 00000 n This choice of categories is arbitrary, e.g. decision sent to author nature communications posted by Manuscript then goes into said editor's pile, and waits until it gets to the front of the line. Did you find it helpful? 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. You will need to go through the through the decision letter to see what the journal has said about the manuscript. The difference, however, is very small. From inspection of Table8, it would seem that SBPR manuscripts by female corresponding authors are more likely to be rejected at the first editorial decision stage than those by male corresponding authors and that DBPR manuscripts by male corresponding authors are less likely to be sent to review than those by female corresponding authors. n - Issue a separate correction notice electronically linked back to the corrected version. When the Editors begin to enter a decision it will move the status to 'Decision in Process'. 50decision sent to authorwaiting for revisionFigure 2 Article proofs sent to author 4. If the article is published, the preprint is updated with a link to the version of record. Trends Ecol Evol. You will receive more information via email from the production team regarding the publication process. 0000003952 00000 n Katz DS, Proto AV, Olmsted WW. When action from your side is required, this will also be announced by email. the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in While these shortcomings of the data are beyond our control, we have made it clear in the Results section when and why we have excluded a subset of the dataset in each aspect of the analysis. 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). 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. Nature Uptake and outcome of manuscripts in Nature journals by review model and author characteristics, https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0049-z, https://www.nature.com/nature/for-authors/initial-submission, https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000001820, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01102.x, https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/.

decision sent to author nature communications 2023