OJS Training | Review Workflow | Adding Article Reviewers

Summary

This script outlines the peer review process for academic journal submissions, emphasizing the decision-making stages of accepting, declining, or sending articles for review. It details the steps involved in assigning editors, anonymizing manuscripts for double-blind reviews, and managing reviewer assignments. The importance of timely reviewer responses and the challenges of finding qualified reviewers are highlighted, with suggestions for handling delays and maintaining the integrity of the review process.

Takeaways

• 📚 The script discusses the process of handling submissions in an academic journal, including options to review, accept without review, or decline submissions.
• 🔍 There are instances where submissions, such as obituaries or editorials from renowned academics, may be accepted without peer review due to their nature and the reputation of the author.
• 🚫 The option to decline a submission is available when the content is not relevant to the journal's focus, such as a computer science paper submitted to a nursing journal.
• 🔄 The script outlines the workflow stages of a submission, starting from acceptance, through review, and possible rounds of revision based on reviewer feedback.
• 👤 The importance of assigning an editor to oversee the submission is highlighted, with the editor potentially making decisions about the need for revisions or selecting reviewers.
• 🎭 The process of sending a submission for review involves choosing which version of the file to send, including considerations for double-blind review where author details must be anonymized.
• 👥 The review stage involves defining review rounds, assigning reviewers, managing file revisions, and facilitating reviewer discussions, with a focus on the number of reviewers typically being odd to avoid ties.
• 📅 The system allows for setting important dates, such as when reviewers should respond to the invitation and when the review should be completed, with provisions for handling overdue reviews.
• 💌 Communication with reviewers is facilitated through the system, including automated emails for reviewer invitations and the ability to follow up on overdue reviews.
• 🔍 Reviewers can be selected from a database, created as new users, or enrolled from existing users, with the system allowing for searching and assigning based on expertise and interest.
• 🔑 The script emphasizes the importance of the review process in ensuring the quality of published articles and the need for effective management of reviewer assignments and communications.

Q & A

What are the options available after receiving a submission in a journal's workflow?

The options include sending the submission for a desk review, accepting the submission without review, or declining the submission if it's not relevant to the journal's focus.

Why would a submission be accepted without review?

Submissions like obituaries or editorial comments from renowned academics in the field may be accepted without review due to their nature and the credibility of the author.

What is the purpose of the 'Skip review' feature in the journal's submission process?

The 'Skip review' feature allows the editorial team to accept certain submissions directly without undergoing the peer review process, typically for submissions from eminent persons or in specific cases like editorials.

What is the typical reason for declining a submission?

A submission might be declined if it is not relevant to the journal's theme or field of study, such as a computer science paper submitted to a nursing journal.

What is the significance of assigning an editor to a submission in the review stage?

Assigning an editor ensures that the submission is overseen by someone knowledgeable in the specific field or subfield of the paper, facilitating a more informed and relevant review process.

Why is it important to anonymize a submission in a double-blind review process?

Anonymizing a submission in a double-blind review process ensures that the reviewers' assessment is not influenced by the authors' identities, reducing potential bias.

What should be done if an author forgets to anonymize their submission?

The editorial team can make the necessary edits to anonymize the submission, such as removing affiliations and names, and then upload the revised file for review.

What does the review round specify in the review stage of a journal's workflow?

The review round specifies the number of reviewers involved in the process, the timeline for their responses, and the revisions of the files associated with the review.

Why might a journal decide to have multiple review rounds?

Multiple review rounds may be necessary if the initial reviews are inconclusive or if there is a significant disagreement among the reviewers, requiring further evaluation.

What are the different types of review processes mentioned in the script?

The script mentions single-blind, double-blind, and open review processes, each with different levels of anonymity for authors and reviewers.

How does a journal editor invite a reviewer to review a submission?

The journal editor can invite a reviewer by adding them from the reviewer database, creating a new reviewer profile, or enrolling an existing user with a different role, such as an author.

What is the importance of maintaining a log of interactions with reviewers in the system?

Maintaining a log of interactions helps track the communication history with reviewers, ensuring transparency and facilitating follow-ups in case of delays or non-responses.