Articles tagged with: Reviewers

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 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...
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 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...
March 10, 2016 | Claire Doffegnies Journals Development Coordinator

Being an editor: the joys and challenges


Journal editors play a crucial role in the publication process; overseeing all editorial aspects. But what is it like to be an editor on a day-to-day basis? What are the joys and challenges in the role? And how do we support our editors?
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...
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...
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...
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 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...
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...
November 10, 2014 | Gary McCulloch Editor of British Journal of Educational Studies

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

Referee reports and how to tackle the classic ‘yes-no-maybe’


It’s common for two academics in the same area of study to have completely different views of the same article. It is not unusual for one to say that a particular article should be published as it stands, while another is emphatic that it should not be published under any circumstances. Read on to find out about Gary McCulloch’s own experience of contradictory feedback as an author and tips for what editors can do in this situation.
Read more...
October 2, 2014 | Dr. Neil Powe Managing Editor of Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

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

The importance of maintaining the human touch


Being an editor is a rewarding yet challenging job with much of the work occurring through an electronic online automated system. Whilst the efficiency of processing is significantly enhanced by such systems, and feedback from the authors and reviewers is mostly positive, it can be difficult to maintain a personal approach.
Read more...
September 16, 2014 | Elaine Devine, Communications Manager (Author Relations) & Dr. Mike J Smith Editor-in-Chief Journal of Maps

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

The role of reviewers


After authors, reviewers are the lifeblood of any journal. Peer review requires independent scrutiny by suitable experts and it is this, in particular, that academic journals offer in terms of “value added.” And reviewers do this without reward. The review process is generally the slowest part of the publication process and can leave an editor particularly frustrated for the following reasons.
Read more...
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.
Read more...
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.
Read more...
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.
Read more...
April 23, 2014 | Fiona Townsend, Publishing Editor - Journal Development

Engaging with the journal community


If your journal adequately represents and supports the interests of its subject community of researchers, authors, reviewers, and Editorial Board members, the community will in turn support the journal. Showing engagement with the community encourages positive sentiment for the journal, motivates future submissions, creates active enthusiasm for the content, and can be a useful way to gather feedback from your readership.
Read more...
March 11, 2014 | Leila Jones Publishing Manager - Journal Development

Peer review matters


We are pleased to be supporting Sense About Science and their Voice of Young Science (VoYS) free peer-review workshops for early-career researchers. The first VoYS peer-review workshop of 2014 will be held at King's College London on Friday April 25, 2014.
Read more...
June 26, 2013 | Helen Talbot, Editorial Systems Coordinator

Publishing ethics


Taylor & Francis is committed to peer review integrity and upholding the highest standards of review in our journals. To help us maintain these high standards, we provide guidelines for ethical publishing for authors, reviewers, and journal editors.
Read more...