Peer review

April 19, 2017 | Claire Doffegnies, Communications Executive

Recognizing reviewers


At Taylor & Francis, we recognize that peer reviewers play an integral role in journal publication. Reviewers invest a huge amount of their time and knowledge in the peer-review process, and as such, we think it’s important to say “thanks.” Read on to find out what we have put in place to show our appreciation …
Read more...
April 11, 2017 | Daniel Johnston Cofounder of Publons

Publons: the importance of recognition in peer review


Daniel JohnstonLast week we revealed details of the new partnership between Taylor & Francis and the online platform Publons, an initiative developed to help reviewers get verified recognition for their contributions. The scheme was cofounded by Andrew Preston and Daniel Johnston with the aim to speed up research by improving peer review.…

Read more...
April 5, 2017 | Claire Doffegnies, Communications Executive

Recognizing reviewers in a new way: a Publons trial


publonsThe peer review process is vital to the strength of a journal, evaluating the quality, validity, and relevance of scholarly research. As Mike J. Smith, Editor-in-Chief of Journal of Maps comments, “reviewers are the lifeblood of any journal”, investing a huge amount of time and expertise in the process.…

Read more...
February 15, 2017 | Tom Murden, Editorial Systems Coordinator

Editorial Manager update: template letters for reviewers

More options when inviting reviewers beyond original submissions


Editorial Manager will soon be releasing their new version (13.1) - and with it there are a number of new features. One of these features is of particularly relevant to how editors will conduct the peer-review process, namely the ability to choose from more than one default letter when inviting reviewers to review a manuscript.…

Read more...
February 10, 2017 | Victoria Farrimond Journals Development Coordinator

Book discount for editors, board members and reviewers


We are pleased to offer all our editors, board members, and reviewers a discount on their purchase of Taylor & Francis Group books (including those under the Routledge, CRC Press, Garland Science, Psychology Press, and Focal Press imprints).
Read more...
December 21, 2016 | Tom Murden Electronic Editorial Systems Coordinator

ScholarOne Release Note Update - Confirmations for Deeplink Email Responses

Changes to confirming your response to Reviewer Invitations


The new version of ScholarOne was released across all Taylor & Francis sites on the 7th December, and with it came some significant changes across the system, including the way deeplinks/hyperlinks work within emails that are sent out to users who are obliged to respond to certain tasks associated with manuscripts they are involved with.
Read more...
December 16, 2016 | Lucy Francis Editorial Office Team Leader

The Peer Review Systems Helpdesk


The process of peer review via an online submission system such as ScholarOne Manuscripts or Editorial Manager often generates queries, and you may not always be able to answer these yourself. Taylor & Francis have a dedicated Peer Review Systems (PRS) Helpdesk to help you.
Read more...
November 22, 2016 | Anna Walton Editorial Systems Coordinator

Making the most of your reviewer list

Using your peer review submission system to help you keep your reviewer list up to date


When examining improvement and development opportunities for your journal, editors should aim to enhance and augment the review process. Many editors would agree that the most difficult element of peer review is finding reviewers who are willing and able to evaluate a paper within a few weeks; yet this is such an integral slice of the journal’s day to day running, as it helps to improve both the speed and quality of the peer review process.…

Read more...
September 23, 2016 | Imogen Clarke Development Editor

Guidelines for reviewing a quantitative research paper


Papers reporting quantitative research may be drawing on a wide variety of data, from temperature readings to survey responses. It is important for the reviewer to judge, to the best of their abilities, if the data are reported accurately and if they support the conclusions drawn.
Read more...
September 22, 2016 | Imogen Clarke Development Editor

Peer Review Week: catch up on our peer review Twitter discussion


Did you catch our peer review chat on Twitter? Our panel of editors joined us from Argentina, Puerto Rico and the UK, taking a rare opportunity to share peer review expertise across regions and disciplines. And joining us from the Taylor & Francis team who manage the systems that facilitate peer review on our journals, we had Gareth and Lucy offering up valuable advice. Our Storify of the event contains peer review tips and insights for editors, reviewers and authors.
Read more...
September 22, 2016 | Imogen Clarke Journal Development Editor

Guidelines for reviewing a clinical research paper


Clinical trials describe the methodology, implementation and results of controlled studies, usually undertaken with large patient groups. These trials are used to test whether a treatment is safe and effective, and their accurate reporting is essential to clinical research and practice. The reviewer plays a crucial role in the process, ensuring that published articles contain reliable and ethically sound research and analysis.
Read more...
September 20, 2016 | Lucy Francis Editorial Office Team Leader

Meet the Taylor & Francis in-house peer review team


Part of the wider Taylor & Francis Electronic Editorial Systems department, the In-House Peer Review (IHPR) team are a group of experts responsible for matters surrounding peer review. What are the team responsible for? How do they support titles across the business? What is CrossRef Similarity Check software, and how do the team use it to check papers for ethical issues? In this post, Lucy Francis, Editorial Office Team Leader, tells us more about the IHPR team, shedding light on how they support journals through the peer review process.
Read more...
September 19, 2016 | Claire Doffegnies Journals Development Coordinator

Peer review in pictures: opening up the black box


The term ‘black box’ often comes up in the discussion around peer review. It seems that sometimes, it isn’t always clear to authors who and what exactly is involved in the process, and how much work it actually takes. Our recent white paper, Peer review: a global view, showed a discrepancy between researchers’ expectation and the reality of how long it takes to review a paper, which may be a symptom of this. So, we’ve put together a handy graphic to shed light on the steps involved in the process – help us open up the black box and share this with the researchers publishing in your journal.
Read more...
August 25, 2016 | Jeffrey D. Roth, MD, Medical Director, Working Sobriety Chicago, Editor, Journal of Groups in Addiction and Recovery

Reviewing manuscripts as a group process


My day job is serving as an addiction psychiatrist and group psychotherapist with a group of colleagues at Working Sobriety Chicago. When I became editor-in-chief of the Journal of Groups in Addiction and Recovery, I brought both my naivete as a journal editor and my experience of working with group processes. One major task as editor has been to stimulate the submission of manuscripts for publication and organize the review process for these manuscripts in line with the journal’s emphasis on the use of groups and sharing.
Read more...
August 24, 2016 | Emma Greenwood, Associate Editorial Director & Bryan Vickery, Director, Cogent OA

Finding the right home for all submitted works

The Cogent transfer service


A manuscript may flow through multiple journals and rounds of review on its way to publication. Authors of work that goes on to be published can sometimes wait many months before publication, with efforts of reviewers and editors expended at each stage. That’s why we created the Cogent Transfer service - journal editors can at the point of rejection simply identify if the manuscript may be suitable for publication elsewhere by selecting the Reject – Unsuitable option. The author will then be offered a transfer to a suitable Cogent OA journal, and has the choice whether to transfer their manuscript or not. If they agree, Taylor & Francis/Cogent OA staff will transfer the manuscript on their behalf, no re-formatting required. Of course, authors are entirely free to submit their manuscript elsewhere.
Read more...
August 5, 2016 | Gareth Meager Editorial Systems Manager

DMARC email sending policy and how this affects your journal

The latest update


Emails from both ScholarOne and Editorial Manager are now DMARC compliant and when sending to email servers that are using authentication criteria – such as Gmail, Yahoo, AOL and many institutions – the email will pass through without any problems. These updates to ensure compliance are now in place and no further action within your peer review system should be required. It is, however, worth noting a few key points.
Read more...
July 18, 2016 | Claire Doffegnies Journals Development Coordinator

Shout out to peer review

We'll be celebrating Peer Review Week 2016


One thing is clear: peer review matters. Editors, authors and publishers alike value the system for the crucial role it plays in ensuring published research is trustworthy, accurate, and meets the highest standards possible within a given field. That’s why, for the second year running, we’ll be joining our peers in making a fuss of peer review during Peer Review Week 2016, from 19 – 25 September.
Read more...
July 11, 2016 | Elaine Devine Senior Communications Manager (Author Relations)

Motivations, training and support in peer review

Read the latest research in ‘Peer review: a global view’


What motivates researchers to peer review, or to publish in peer reviewed journals? What training would researchers like to access before accepting an invitation to review? Read the 10 key findings from our latest research into peer review and find out what authors, reviewers and fellow journal editors really think motivates researchers to publish and review.
Read more...
July 5, 2016 | Anna Walton, Editorial Systems Coordinator

Release news – ScholarOne 4.19


There has recently been a new ScholarOne release which has updated the look of the ScholarOne home page and menu, as well as the author dashboard and submission interface.
Read more...
June 27, 2016 | Joanne Thomas, Projects and Events Coordinator and Emily Jesper, Head of Partnerships and Governance, Sense about Science

Supporting early career researchers

Q&A with Sense about Science


In this virtual Q&A, get to know Sense about Science. What do they get asked the most about peer review? How do they think journal editors can benefit from involving early career researchers in the peer review process? And what are the challenges for ECRs getting involved? Joanne Thomas and Emily Jesper from Sense about Science discuss all this and more.
Read more...
June 6, 2016 | Gareth Meager Editorial Systems Manager

DMARC email sending policy and how this affects your journal

Changes to email ‘from’ addresses in peer review systems


The peer review systems widely used at Taylor & Francis - both Editorial Manager and ScholarOne Manuscripts – typically operate by sending emails and alerts from the system as if sent by a named user, where the from address and the @server.com details do not match. This is known as ‘spoofing’. In legitimate use, spoofing acts as a good way to send emails from within an organization’s server (in this case the peer review systems) but appear to the outside world to be from another person. The ‘from’ address may appear as “person@university.com” even though the actual domain of the sending server is something else, such as “email@peerreviewsystem.com”. This is the core of DMARC policy, and email providers are now checking to make sure these two domains (the ‘from’ address and the sending server) match so that spammers are not able to ‘spoof’ genuine email as a means to appear more trustworthy.
Read more...
April 25, 2016 | Elaine Devine Senior Communications Manager

Spread the (peer review) word

Apply now for a free Sense about Science early career researcher workshop


Simple advice and guidance on peer review is essential for every researcher, and that’s why we’re continuing to support Sense about Science’s free peer review workshops, the first of which (for 2016) is being held in central London on Friday 13 May. Tell your early career researcher friends and colleagues there’s still time to apply, all they need to do is send a CV and covering letter by 4 May.
Read more...
February 19, 2016 | Claire Doffegnies, Journals Development Coordinator & Lynsey Haire, Head of Electronic Editorial Systems

Finding reviewers is now faster and simpler


At Taylor & Francis, we are always working hard to develop our electronic peer-review systems to improve and enhance the quality of peer review, and to help make submission and peer-review management simpler, smoother, and more straightforward for journal editors, authors, and reviewers. Read on to find out more about the recent changes we have made, why, and how to get the most out of the latest developments to your electronic peer-review system.
Read more...
February 2, 2016 | Luke Peedell, Peer Review Coordinator

Ethical considerations when assigning independent reviewers


As a fundamental step of the peer review process, it is essential for editors to select appropriate reviewers for each manuscript. Ideally, chosen reviewers will be experts in their field and have significant area-specific knowledge on the manuscript’s topic, but why do editors also need to consider the ethics behind their choice of reviewer?
Read more...
December 10, 2015 | Professor Jacqueline Stevenson Head of Research, Sheffield Institute of Education, Sheffield Hallam University

The importance of training in peer review


I have been peer-reviewing academic papers for journals for more than a decade. I pride myself on being a reliable and supportive reviewer: I take time to read and make notes on any paper I am reviewing and then write a review which will, I hope, be comprehensive enough to offer the author requisite advice.…

Read more...
November 30, 2015 | Elaine Devine Communications Manager

Ethics in peer review – the reality for researchers


Ethical issues in peer review, whether gender bias, competitor delays, seniority bias, false identities, review ‘rings’, or a number of other issues, have gained much coverage in the media, on social media and on blog sites in the last twelve months. But are ethical issues in peer review as widespread as they seem? We asked researchers from across the sciences, social sciences, humanities and medicine, who had experience of publishing in a number of peer reviewed journals (with both Taylor & Francis and other publishers), to tell us about their perception of the prevalence of ethical issues in peer review.
Read more...
October 27, 2015 | Elaine Devine Communications Manager, Taylor & Francis

Taking peer review’s pulse: read ‘Peer review in 2015: a global view’

The view from journal authors, reviewers and editors on peer review


What do journal authors, reviewers and editors think of the system still very much at the heart of scholarly communication? Read one of the largest research studies into peer review in recent years, as we launch ‘Peer review in 2015: a global view’.
Read more...
October 13, 2015 | Lucy Francis Peer Review Coordinator

Plagiarism and dual submission


As a journal editor, you may have experienced cases where unattributed text overlap has been identified in a paper submitted to your journal, requiring you to take action. You may have been fortunate enough not to have experienced such a situation, but are concerned that, sooner or later, you will. So, what should you do if this does happen?
Read more...
September 25, 2015 | Helen Talbot, Editorial Systems Coordinator

Editorial Manager: free reporting webinar


Spaces are still available on Aries’ Enterprise Analytics Reporting (EAR) Webinar on September 30. Sign up to this free event and learn how to use this powerful tool to enhance the management of your journal.
Read more...
September 7, 2015 | Leila Jones Publishing Manager – Journal Development

What to remember when writing a review


Our popular reviewer guidelines were created to support our valued peer reviewers and ensure they have all the information they need to write an effective review. Drawing on these and other scholars’ ideas, we’ve come up with some of the most important things to remember when writing a review of a journal submission. Whether you are a seasoned reviewer, or just getting started, we hope you find these guidelines and suggestions helpful.
Read more...
August 24, 2015 | Elizabeth Allen Ph.D. student, King's College, London

The next generation of peer reviewers

Getting them involved in the discussion


Who’s the next generation of peer reviewers? Read on to find out why you should be encouraging the early-career researchers you work with to attend the latest Sense about Science workshop (and why we’re supporting them).
Read more...
July 6, 2015 | Tamara Bowler Peer Review Coordinator

Required reviewers – customizing for the exception, not the rule


Inspired by frequently asked questions from editors, our dedicated EES (Electronic Editorial Systems) team share their top tips on getting the best out of your peer review management system. In this post, how do you change the minimal number of reviewers necessary to complete the review stage of a manuscript? Read on.
Read more...
June 18, 2015 | Siobhán Aldridge Editorial Systems Coordinator

Special tips for a special issue


Inspired by frequently asked questions from editors, our dedicated EES (Electronic Editorial Systems) team share their top tips on getting the best out of your peer review management system. In this post, we give you some special tips for publishing a special issue. Don't miss them - read on.
Read more...
May 18, 2015 | Claire Doffegnies Journals Development Coordinator

Top 5 tips on peer review


Peer Review is one of the most discussed topics in scholarly publishing. Despite the concerns and criticisms of the system, peer review is still a crucial part of academic communication and relies on the trust and cooperation of everyone involved to make it work effectively.…

Read more...
May 18, 2015 | Elaine Devine, Communications Manager (Author Relations)

Spread the (peer review) word

There’s still time to apply for Sense About Science’s workshop


Simple advice and guidance on peer review is essential for every researcher, and that’s why we’re continuing to support Sense About Science’s free peer review workshops, the first of which (for 2015) is being held in central London on Friday 29 May. Tell your early career researcher friends and colleagues there’s still time to apply, all they need to do is send a CV and covering letter by Friday 22 May.
Read more...
May 18, 2015 | Gareth Meager Editorial Systems Manager

Reminding reviewers – how to get the best response


Inspired by frequently asked questions from editors, our dedicated EES (Electronic Editorial Systems) team share their top tips on getting the best out of your peer review management system. In this post, how do you remind reviewers to complete their report once they have agreed to review? Read on.
Read more...
May 6, 2015 | Lucy Francis External Peer Review Supervisor

What to do when there is an ethical issue


Inspired by frequently asked questions from editors, our dedicated EES (Electronic Editorial Systems) team share their top tips on getting the best out of your peer review management system. In this post, what do you do if you suspect, or are notified of, a potential ethical issue regarding a manuscript in peer review? Read on.
Read more...
March 9, 2015 | Peter Gilroy Editor of the Journal of Education for Teaching

Seven tips for recruiting and retaining referees

The steps one editor takes to maintain a good reviewer panel


I had no idea as an author of the difficulties that editors have in recruiting and retaining referees. That innocent phase ended once I began editing a journal, and had to identify and then negotiate with referees directly. My experience as a reviewer meant I wanted to work with referees in a different way. These are the steps I take to ensure we rarely have tardy or non-responsive referees.
Read more...
January 26, 2015 | Victoria Murphy Programme Manager at Sense About Science

Why peer review matters when asking for evidence


Since Sense About Science was set up in 2002, we have been working to popularize an understanding of peer review amongst policy makers, journalists, social influencers, and civic organizations. Peer review may not be a perfect system, but asking if something is peer-reviewed is a good first question in helping people distinguish between science and opinion.
Read more...
January 14, 2015 | Jade Louch Editorial Systems Coordinator

ScholarOne Manuscripts Optima


ScholarOne Manuscripts Optima is a feature available across all Taylor & Francis and Routledge ScholarOne sites. It integrates elements of ScholarOne Manuscripts with Web of ScienceTM and EndNote from Thomson Reuters to give a range of features to help make the lives of authors, editors, and reviewers easier when using the system.
Read more...
January 14, 2015 | Elaine Devine, Communications Manager (Author Relations)

Supporting authors, reviewers, and editors through peer review: essential resources


Peer review plays an integral role in helping to ensure published research is accurate, trustworthy, and meets the highest standards of research within a given field. It’s an essential part of the publication process for many journals but navigating peer review can seem like a minefield, whether you are a journal editor, someone who reviews papers, or the author.
Read more...
December 19, 2014 | Lynn Degele Editorial Systems Co-Ordinator

Exporting to production webinars


Our new webinars walk you through completing the necessary steps to export accepted papers to Production from your ScholarOne Manuscripts site.
Read more...
November 27, 2014 | Leila Jones Publishing Manager – Journal Development

Voice of Young Science interview with Victoria Murphy


Supported by Taylor & Francis, Sense About Science’s Voice of Young Science (VoYS) “Peer review: the nuts and bolts” workshops run each year in various locations across the U.K. and are streamed via Google Hangout. We joined some early-career researchers for one of these workshops at the beautiful University of St. Andrews in Fife at the end of November. Leila Jones caught up with Victoria Murphy, Programme Manager at Sense About Science.
Read more...
November 26, 2014 | Gareth Meager Editorial Systems Manager

“Set my search preferences” on ScholarOne Manuscripts

How to save your search preferences for future use


Searching for and selecting reviewers is a crucial part of the editorial process and using the tools at your disposal within your ScholarOne submission site can make it a much more productive and time-saving process. The “Set my search preferences” option is available at the “select reviewer” step of the workflow and is a way to predetermine and save your own preferences for how you want the search results to be displayed.
Read more...