Diversity in Peer review – the perspective of Journal of Animal Ecology Associate Editors

Fitting with our theme of #DiversityinEcology the theme of peer review week 2018 is diversity in peer review. To celebrate we decided to ask the people at the coalface of delivering the peer review process, our Associate Editors, why diversity in peer review is so important. At JAE our committed team of Associate Editors are responsible for selecting and inviting reviewers and subsequently evaluating the … Continue reading Diversity in Peer review – the perspective of Journal of Animal Ecology Associate Editors

Journal of Animal EcologySeptember 14, 2018October 26, 20181 Comment

Peer review week

The Peer Review Process for the British Ecological Society journals

This time last year the British Ecological Society Publications team surveyed all researchers that had either submitted a manuscript to or reviewed a manuscript for, one or more of the five BES Journals.

A key recommendation from the survey was to provide more detail on the peer review process for the BES Journals. As it is Peer Review Week and the theme is transparency we thought this was a great opportunity to breakdown the peer review process that the BES Journals use and make it more transparent, we have done this by providing a summary of the peer review process on the BES journals hub page. Below I have summarized this process for Journal of Animal Ecology: Continue reading “The Peer Review Process for the British Ecological Society journals”

Journal of Animal EcologySeptember 13, 2017October 13, 2017Leave a comment

Peer review week

What do reviewers want?

Last year’s Peer Review Week proved to be a great success in raising awareness and starting discussions about peer review. This year, it’s back and the focus is on recognition for review.

There have been lots of surveys looking at perceptions of peer review. These surveys agree that peer review is valued and authors feel that the quality of their paper improves as a result. Nature’s annual author survey shows that after the reputation of the journal and relevance to the discipline, the quality of peer review was the third most important factor driving author’s choice of where to submit their article.

For Peer Review Week 2016, I thought I’d take another look at these surveys to see what they tell us about recognition for reviewing activity. I’m concentrating on three big surveys that were carried out in 2015 by Wiley, Taylor and Francis (T&F), and the Publishing Research Consortium (PRC). Sense about Science also conducted a survey in 2009.

243202_final-artwork-700x300-2 Continue reading “What do reviewers want?”