May 1, 2018 |
Peer Review Systems Coordinator
Tips from our expert on peer review systems
One of the easiest ways to find peer reviewers for your journal is by using keywords. Our in-house peer review expert, Tom Murden, explains how using a pre-defined list of keywords, alongside keywords submitted by the author, could make it easier for you to find peer reviewers.
February 23, 2017 |
Editorial Systems Manager
The latest update
Following our original post about DMARC policy changes and how this has affected the way emails from peer review systems are handled, here is the latest information and some key tips to keep in mind.
December 16, 2016 |
Editorial Office Team Leader
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.
July 5, 2016 |
Anna Walton, Editorial Systems Coordinator
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.
March 16, 2016 |
Matt Cannon, Publisher (Publisher, Earth and Environmental Science)
Senior Communications Manager (Author Relations)
Biological, Earth and Environmental Science journals trial including ORCiDs as standard in online submissions
We’re trialling including ORCiDs on every submission to some of our biological, earth and environmental science journals. Find out what an ORCiD is, what the benefits are, and why we’re running this trial. Plus, tell us what you think – can it really save time, reduce errors and ensure researchers get credit for all their research activities?
February 19, 2016 |
Claire Doffegnies, Journals Development Coordinator & Lynsey Haire, Head of Electronic Editorial Systems
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.
February 11, 2015 |
Professor Elliot Shubert
Editor-in-Chief, Systematics and Biodiversity
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.”
January 14, 2015 |
Editorial Systems Coordinator
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.
December 19, 2014 |
Editorial Systems Co-Ordinator
Our new webinars walk you through completing the necessary steps to export accepted papers to Production from your ScholarOne Manuscripts site.
October 2, 2014 |
Dr. Neil Powe
Managing Editor of Journal of Environmental Planning and Management
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.
September 16, 2014 |
Elaine Devine, Communications Manager (Author Relations) &
Dr. Mike J Smith
Editor-in-Chief Journal of Maps
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.
July 11, 2014 |
Elena Chirciu, External Peer Review Supervisor
Editorial Systems Co-Ordinator
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.