Articles tagged with: Guidelines

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 …
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.
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.
November 16, 2015 | Amanda Ashworth Publisher

Veto on the use of null hypothesis testing and p intervals: right or wrong?

It’s a brave editor who takes a decision to change accepted practice for submissions and peer review, particularly when he knows that his reasoning is controversial, that there are strong opposing views, and that the reaction from the scholarly community is likely to be highly polarized – and very vocal. But that didn’t stop Dr. David Trafimow, editor of Basic and Applied Social Psychology, from announcing in an editorial in the first issue of 2015 that the journal will cease accepting papers that relied on certain statistical methods – especially the null hypothesis significance testing procedure – with immediate effect. Because of the huge amount of attention the editorial has received, we’ve invited Dr. Trafimow and respected colleagues to reflect on the reaction to his editorial and what the ban may mean for future scholarly research.
October 27, 2015 | Ellie Gilroy Managing Editor

Mind the gap! Editor transition planning – tips for editors

A great editor is fundamental to a journal’s health and success. However, every great editor has to eventually make way for their successor. The transition period between editors can be a complex process, involving contracts, systems, mentoring and above all, careful timing.…

October 1, 2015 | Sarah Robbie, Peer Review Manager

Publishing ethics and the role of the editor

Publishing ethics and ethics misconduct are something that journal editors certainly hear a lot about, whether through direct experience in dealing with misconduct on their journals, or through reading about them more and more in the media. But why are ethics important? And what is the role of the editor in ethics? Find out in this post.
June 16, 2015 | Leila Jones Publishing Manager - Journal Development

Twitter tips for editors

Many journals editors are embracing Twitter in order to reach a digital audience and promote their journal(s) more widely. A well-managed journal Twitter account, as part of a wider marketing strategy, can help build and maintain the brand and reputation of journals and enable editors to connect with authors and readers on a personal level, enhancing key relationships. To help support our editors who are already using Twitter to promote the journals they work on (and those who are keen to give it a try), we have put together some guidelines and tips. Why not share yours with us?
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.
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.
September 8, 2014 | Raymond Tellis, Open Access Publishing Editor & Vicky Gardner Open Access Publisher

An overview of HEFCE’s new OA policy

Guidance for editors

A short summary of key points around the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) OA policy for the “post-2014” REF. This post covers points relevant to editors and society partners and includes example timelines for reference.
August 6, 2014 | Leila Jones Publishing Manager - Journal Development

Reviewer guidelines and best practice

At Taylor & Francis we understand the importance of an effective review when authors choose to submit their research to one of our journals. The reviewing process varies from journal to journal, but this guide serves as an overview of what’s involved when becoming a reviewer with a Taylor & Francis journal.
August 1, 2014 | Lynsey Haire, Head of Electronic Editorial Systems

Peer review “match-fixing” & author-suggested reviewers

If you regularly commission peer reviews from referees suggested by authors, then beware the unscrupulous academic who is “match-fixing” the review of their paper. Safeguard the integrity of your peer-review process with these quick and simple checks.
July 31, 2014 | Lynn Degele Editorial Systems Co-Ordinator

Verifying the reviewer’s credentials in the field

Some journals allow authors to suggest preferred reviewers at submission stage. As recent events in the industry have shown, it is essential to verify the authenticity of these reviewers before deciding whether to contact them to review. This article illustrates how you can check each person named in the Preferred Reviewers section of the ScholarOne Manuscripts submission form to reduce the likelihood of system gaming and unethical conduct.
July 11, 2014 | Elena Chirciu, External Peer Review Supervisor Lynn Degele Editorial Systems Co-Ordinator

Checking co-author information

Nip time-consuming authorship disputes in the bud

Unethical authorship practices have become increasingly common in academia in recent years. Inappropriate listing of someone as a co-author may be due to a misunderstanding over what constitutes a contribution worthy of an authorship credit as opposed to an acknowledgment; however the existence of unscrupulous practices such as “gift authorship” raises serious concerns for journal editors.
June 9, 2014 | Fiona Counsell, Managing Editor

Visual multimedia

A practical guide

Video content is proving to be a very effective tool for helping to raise the profile of journals. This new guide is full of practical advice about how you can record your own pieces to camera.
February 12, 2014 | Lynsey Haire, Head of Electronic Editorial Systems

ScholarOne Manuscripts support

A reminder about the wealth of ScholarOne Manuscripts training materials available for editors and journal staff, designed to put you in control of your own learning.
June 27, 2013 |

Social media guidelines

There are many forms of social media networks available – Twitter and Facebook are two of the larger, more popular social networking brands, while others include Google+, LinkedIn, Pinterest, and YouTube.
June 27, 2013 |

ScholarOne Manuscripts

ScholarOne Manuscripts is an online peer review system that allows editors and editorial offices to manage the submission and peer review of articles. Every step of the peer review process can be handled online with minimal effort by the user, allowing more efficient peer review and as a result, faster manuscript processing times.…

June 26, 2013 |

Comments, Responses, and Rejoinders

Guidelines for dealing with “Letters to the editor”

From time to time journal editors may receive correspondence from a reader which offers critical comments on a published article. Such correspondence is traditionally known as “Letters to the editor.” In the age of blogs and online comments, such correspondence is commonplace, and we believe you will find these guidelines helpful in dealing with it.
June 26, 2013 |

Authorship guidelines

Given the increasing frequency of challenges to authorship, we believe it is essential to establish rules to govern authorship.