Effects of a reviewer-prompting strategy on timely manuscript reviews.
نویسندگان
چکیده
We studied a reviewer-prompting system designed to improve the timeliness of journal reviews. The prompting system consisted of an e-mail message sent individually to reviewers noting the manuscript number, review due date, and associated social amenities for the timely completion of the task. Our results indicated that the prompting system increased timely reviews.
منابع مشابه
Editorial Peer Reviewers' Recommendations at a General Medical Journal: Are They Reliable and Do Editors Care?
BACKGROUND Editorial peer review is universally used but little studied. We examined the relationship between external reviewers' recommendations and the editorial outcome of manuscripts undergoing external peer-review at the Journal of General Internal Medicine (JGIM). METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS We examined reviewer recommendations and editors' decisions at JGIM between 2004 and 2008. Fo...
متن کاملAn Incentive Solution to the Peer Review Problem
April 2007 | Volume 5 | Issue 4 | e107 An Incentive Solution to the Peer Review Problem Marc Hauser, Ernst Fehr Every researcher knows the experience: you send a manuscript in for review and it disappears into the ether as you wait, a painfully long time, for the review. As scientists, we want immediate gratifi cation: either accept or reject. This enables us to move on with our work, building ...
متن کاملReview History of 2009ja015069
Below and/or attached are two reviews of the above manuscript. I am pleased to report that Reviewer #1 finds the manuscript acceptable for publication but Reviewer #2 still has some strong concerns. I have some sympathy with the view expressed in your covering letter, that Reviewer #2 may have a biased attitude. However, it would be inappropriate for me to entirely ignore their comments, so I p...
متن کاملThe peer-review process.
Most authors experience that “sinking feeling” when reviewers’ comments and recommendations lead to rejection of a manuscript or the need for multiple revisions. It is important to bear in mind that this happens to most, if not all, scientists. Many times the reviewer or editor is correct, and with suitable revision, a better paper is ultimately published. Sometimes it is not. The author can th...
متن کاملDoes mentoring new peer reviewers improve review quality? A randomized trial
BACKGROUND Prior efforts to train medical journal peer reviewers have not improved subsequent review quality, although such interventions were general and brief. We hypothesized that a manuscript-specific and more extended intervention pairing new reviewers with high-quality senior reviewers as mentors would improve subsequent review quality. METHODS Over a four-year period we randomly assign...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- Journal of applied behavior analysis
دوره 37 4 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2004