Articles tagged with: Peer review

September 15, 2017 | Tom Murden Electronic Editorial Systems Coordinator

How to report on your journal’s data using ScholarOne Manuscripts


The primary function of ScholarOne Manuscripts (S1M) is to host and facilitate your journal’s peer review activity. All activity, from the start of the submission process to the point at which an editor makes a decision on a manuscript, is recorded within the system.…

Read more...
September 14, 2017 | Dr Mike J Smith Editor-in-Chief, 'Journal of Maps'

The why, what and how of supplementary materials

Dr Mike J. Smith shares his advice and best practice


Dr Mike J. Smith is Editor-in-Chief of the Taylor & Francis publication, Journal of Maps. He has previously written for Editor Resources to reflect on his career as a journal editor, and also to share his experiences of moving to open access.…

Read more...
September 13, 2017 | Kathy Robson Editorial Systems Manager

Peer review support for guest editors on your journal


Whilst support documentation and training for new editors is a standard element of the training program on submission systems, what you may not know is we can also offer training and process documentation to your guest editors.  Whether they are handling one special issue or managing a volume, we, the Electronic Editorial Systems team, are on hand to assist.…

Read more...
September 12, 2017 | Dr Sally Gainsbury Editor, 'International Gambling Studies'

Creating a clear peer review process: an International Gambling Studies case study

Dr Sally Gainsbury shares her editorial process instructions


Dr Sally Gainsbury is a psychology gambling researcher at the University of Sydney, and Editor of the Taylor & Francis journal, International Gambling Studies. To ensure an efficient editorial process, Dr Gainsbury has composed an extensive guide detailing instructions for Regional Assistant Editors (RAE) on the journal’s board.…

Read more...
September 11, 2017 | Victoria Farrimond Journals Development Coordinator

Effective & efficient peer review management

Celebrate Peer Review Week 2017 with Editor Resources


To celebrate this year’s Peer Review Week, we’re bringing you a new post each day to help you ensure an effective and efficient editorial process on your journal. Look out for articles on best practice in managing reviewers and supplementary material, as well as tips to help you get the best results out of your submission system.…

Read more...
August 30, 2017 | Emma Cianchi, Communications Executive

Upcoming webinar: Expert View on Managing Reviewers

Join our panel of experts for tools and tips on managing reviewers


In the second episode of our Expert View webinar series, we have lined up a panel of experts to help you explore tips and tools to find and retain reviewers, as well as advice on how to effectively manage the peer review process.
Read more...
August 23, 2017 | Victoria Kennelly, Peer Review Systems Coordinator

What do you think of our submission system video tutorials?

User test our upcoming video tutorials for ScholarOne Manuscripts & Editorial Manager


The Peer Review Systems team here at Taylor & Francis have been working on creating a range of short video tutorials to help guide our editors through some of the features on both our ScholarOne Manuscripts and Editorial Manager submissions systems.…

Read more...
August 21, 2017 | Katie Williams, Production Team Leader; Lucy Francis, Editorial Office Team Leader; Julie Sutton, Business Analyst & Anna Thompson, Production Editor & Supplier Development Specialist

Introducing the Journals Communication Hub

Offering better support communications for Taylor & Francis authors and editors


In order to improve our service to Authors and Editors we are introducing a query management system, the Journals Communication Hub (JCH), which is based on journal-specific email addresses. Authors and Editors will still have the same contacts for Production and Peer Review Systems but they will just respond from the journal addresses instead of their own email.…

Read more...
July 10, 2017 | Tom Murden Electronic Editorial Systems Coordinator

Introducing the new user interface from ScholarOne Manuscripts


From the 10th July, ScholarOne Manuscripts (S1M) will be rolling out their new release – v4.21. The sole feature of this release is centred around the new User interface (UI) that reviewers will use. We are keen to provide our editors with some insight into this new element of your S1M sites before you see the change across the system:

S1M has described this improvement as ‘new and cleaner’.…
Read more...
June 22, 2017 | 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. We work to establish and sustain peer-review integrity on every journal and a vital part of this means ensuring that reviewers have the appropriate resources to carry out their work as efficiently and effectively as possible. 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.
Read more...
June 20, 2017 | Lan Murdock, Communications Manager

Top takeaways from 2017 Council of Science Editor Annual Meeting


It was a great learning experience for me to attend the 60th anniversary meeting of the Council of Science Editors(CSE) last month. The theme this year was ‘Setting Sail: Navigating the Future of Science Publishing’, looking at the challenges facing science editors during times of great changes in scientific publishing. The two-day program was packed with interesting sessions from peer review innovation to implementation of data policy and new industry standards.
Read more...
May 12, 2017 | Victoria Farrimond Journals Development Coordinator

Turning around turnaround times: peer review timeline strategy


It goes without saying that the peer review process is essential in ensuring the quality of published work; however, it can be a timely system that can often frustrate authors that are awaiting a decision, while editors face the prospect of delayed publication of their journal.…

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

Creating a clear peer review picture: announcing Peer Review Week 2017


Peer review is a crucial part of scholarly communication, ensuring that published research is trustworthy, accurate, and meets the highest standards possible within a given field. That’s why this year we’ll once again be supporting Peer Review Week, running from 11th to 17th September. Get the date in your diary, and find out how you can get involved.
Read more...
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 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 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...
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...
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...
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.
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...
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...
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...
February 11, 2015 | Professor Elliot Shubert Editor-in-Chief, Systematics and Biodiversity

What I wish I’d known when I first started editing a journal

How teamwork and an online submission system helped one editor


Taking over a journal can be challenging but there are saving factors, including online submission systems. Discover how simple changes helped one editor, and how being an editor isn’t a “one-man show.”
Read more...
February 11, 2015 | James Hardcastle Research Manager

Citations, self-citations, and citation stacking


We have covered the diverse range of citation metrics in previous posts and although their number continues to grow, the Impact Factor is still the most important. Despite increasing concerns about how the Impact Factor is being used, far beyond its main purpose to evaluate citation profiles of journals, it is a key metric on which authors choose journals and often editors want to ensure theirs is as high as possible.
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...