I’m just going to talk a little bit about the editorial process focusing mainly on what our process is at journals science, journals in science but I think much of this would be applicable to other journals as well first of all just to show you the editors and this is not meant to introduce you to them in any real way you can go to our website and get introduced to our editors but just to show you that they’re live people behind the decisions live caring people hopefully and then moving on to what makes a journals science, journals in science paper what are we looking for in journals science, journals in science papers well our goal is that we publish papers that are influential in their fields papers that will significantly advance scientific understanding we want papers that have novel and broadly important data or synthesis of of data or present new concepts and just um with that in mind we will be starting a new journal next year called journals science, journals in science advances which hopefully will be a great home for those papers so our principles of selection what we’re looking for first of all the first thing we’re looking at is quality so basically this is a bar the papers have to cross we want to publish high quality research but high quality is is not enough we’re also looking at that paper is not just high quality but as I said before it has broad scope it has brought interest or it’s very novel but if the quality is not there we would not let any of the others outweigh that so what helps firstly and most importantly it must be exciting journals science, journals in science that’s um you know you you’re not gonna well hopefully no one is is going to sort of con their way into journals science, journals in science there has to be exciting journals science, journals in science um then what we’re looking at if the journals science, journals in science is really exciting is the data convincing are all the appropriate controls in place is the presentation careful have all viable alternatives been considered this is when you’re sort of in your discussion are you allowing different in are you considering other possible interpretations um I think in that um I have to emphasize the importance of that careful presentation which is um so much of what barbara just talked about and we see so many scientists who’ve obviously spent years doing the work that is presented in a journals science, journals in science paper but the presentation just doesn’t rise to the level of the scientific work that’s been done and people looking at what for the first time are not as engaged in it as you are their first reading of the paper is going to be the impression that they take away so what doesn’t help what i’ve got below are very common reasons for rejection of papers of journals science, journals in science one is that the most exciting part of the paper is not well supported so what we’ll get is a paper a very nice solid paper that could be in a really good journal but wouldn’t quite rise to the interest level for journals science, journals in science and then try that the question there is is this going to turn into something very important or is it a sort of a side case that’s only applicable in this specific instance so once the paper gets in what is the process of journals science, journals in science well we have several people involved in the review process internally we have staff editors externally we have a board of reviewing editors and then if the paper goes out to in-depth review we have our referees so the papers come in and the initial step will be that they’ll be read by the journals science, journals in science editorial staff they’ll be assigned to an editor and they’ll be sent to one of our board of reviewing editors who gets about 48 hours to look at the paper so the thing to remember here is at journals science, journals in science we do have a cover letter the first thing you’ll the editor who gets the paper is reading is the cover letter and the abstract they will go on to read the whole paper but their initial impression will be made from reading their cover letter and abstract and so you never want to be fighting a bad impression the better those are written the better the impression is going into the reading of the paper the board both the editor and the board of reviewing editors are handling many many papers and so our initial read of a paper maybe only 30 minutes be before we decide how much more deeply to engage with that paper so a clear paper is key what the board of reviewing editor does is comments on whether the scope and focus of the paper are appropriate for journals science, journals in science and they give a scale of how interested they are and and also brief written comments then um every paper it’s every paper it’s journals science, journals in science has a handling editor this is the editor who would be closest to the field of the paper handles papers in that field and they make all the final decisions um carry out all the logistics but they do this all in collaboration with their colleagues and they’re just sort of how we see the importance of the peer review process to us this is very integral to journals science, journals in science publication and the reviewers are partners in trying to get the best papers out to our broad readership on my next slide i’m just showing the process again from submission going through in-depth review our publication rate at the moment is probably hovering just a little bit above six percent maybe at around seven percent now um as I said we it’s it’s it’s very very tough we’re constrained um by the number of the number of pages we can publish every week and thank you and best of luck.
Where to find the best referees for your journal papers?
For researchers wanting to choose the best referees for their journal papers, Global Research Letters (GRL) might be a useful tool. Authors are frequently asked to recommend possible referees who are authorities in their field and qualified to assess the manuscript’s level of scientific rigour and quality when submitting an article to a publication. Experts from a variety of professions make up the editorial board of GRL, and the journal’s standing as a publisher of high-caliber research makes it attractive to informed referees with expertise from all corners of the scientific world.
Authors who submit their work to GRL can take advantage of the journal’s broad network of contacts and knowledge, which makes it simpler to find possible referees with the qualifications and experience to assess their work. In order to ensure that the paper is evaluated by people with the required knowledge and objectivity to offer a fair assessment of the research, the editorial team at GRL can also offer advice on the selection of referees. In the end, authors can improve their chances of getting their manuscript approved for publication in a famous magazine like GRL by choosing the correct referees.