Charleston Shoe Co Locations,
Adelaide Crows Membership Transfer,
Articles E
The focus on establishing agreement of at least the majority or the supermajority and avoiding unproductive opinion differentiates consensus from unanimity, which requires . Usually, the times vary from two to six months, but there is no fixed rule. Consequently, infrastructures may best be understood as manifestations of specific operations or sometimes even of a whole process (Niewhner, 2014, 6). Recht Manage. (Bloomberg) -- U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson committed tens of billions of pounds for a controversial new high speed rail line linking London with cities to the north, despite soaring costs and mounting anger from his own Conservative Party colleagues.The High Speed 2 (HS2) development will become Europe's largest infrastructure project but it has suffered delays and criticism of its . This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. We have shown in our contribution, that the peer review process in digital infrastructures is complex: We started from an abstract description of a minimal peer review process with four elements according to Schendzielorz and Reinhart (2020), acknowledged an ideal digitalized process with seventeen positioned components according to a patent (Plotkin, 2009) and empirically found an open process with 72 events in it. Sorted by: 2 Usually they decide in less than a week after the initial submission. Currently there is so far no systematic analysis of the structure of practices in the peer review process. The two additional source and target nodes make start and end of the process visible. 2022.6.13 Editor Decision Started Decision sent to author NZip for reviewers 2022.10.10 9All Reviewers Assigned109Manuscript under consideration How does the infrastructure support, strengthen or restrain editorial agency for administrating the process? How do I write an inquiry to the editor about my manuscript's current status? Further, it indicates respect for the authors as sentient beings possibly frustrated about a negative decision. What is the meaning of "decision in process" status? Giving Bolivian Women As Gift ideas When Trigidia Jimnez started to provide caahua, it was only for private consumption in Bolivia, but today it's produced and offered by more than 1,500 households. We use the perspective of the infrastructure by studying the recorded events it has created as a result of actions by different actors. 201451XXXXX@nature.com Final decision for XXXXXDecision---Accepted, 52012scientific, PRLAFMScientific reportA201220134a10, 20135a, , B20137b910bcdraftDraftAB20manuSI, nature4440nature physicstransfertransfer20Thanksnice., manuSIresponse letter20, 20Decision sent to author- Waiting for revisionWaiting for revision, , live manuPost Decision Manus (1)live manuPost Decision ManusPost Decision Manuslive manuManu under submission - Manu received - Editor assigned - Manu under consideration - Decision sent to author, NatureManu under considerationundere review, SCI, Bioart/FreescienceQQ, 201451, Final decision for XXXXXDecision---Accepted, 2012scientific, PRLAFMScientific reportA2012, 20134a10, 20135a, nature4440nature physicstransfer, 20Thanksnice., Manu under considerationundere review, . The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the (For one manuscript, no first version was present in the inventory hence, the difference between 14,392 and 14,391 manuscripts). Received 2021 Jul 26; Accepted 2021 Sep 20. decision started . Accordingly, our process elements are strongly linked by the first couple of passage points, because they indicate states of transition. The administrative procedures appear to be well covered by Editor assigned (N = 17,499), Editor Replaced (N = 561) and Secondary Editor Replaced (N = 333) as well as events indicating the contacting or assignment of reviewers: the editors choose the reviewers (expressed by Potential Referees Assigned (N = 10,888) and Contacting Potential Referees (N = 19,878)) and are informed about the outcome of their request with All Referees Assigned (N = 3,607). Different to what the patent for the technology suggests, the actual use of the infrastructure may be particularly complex, revealing the difficulties in managing and maintaining collaboration among different types of actors. Decoding the decision letter - Cell The editor and the editorial team decide whether or not to send the manuscript out to review; the corresponding author is contacted with the decision. Following her doctorate, she has worked as an editor, freelance writer and communications expert and advisor . They enable, support or constrain some behaviours, but they can also make certain activities more visible and thereby more relevant than others, they pick and choose (ibid., 1). Nature might offer the option to send a submission to Research Square so that it is made public (and time stamped) while still in the review process, but the only system which matters for their reviewing process is that of Nature. Consensus decision-making - Wikipedia Sometimes, it is mentioned, who is involved in the said actions, but sometimes not. Also, the database is, of course, more complex and stores lots of information from user accounts to e-mail communication, but our analyses refer exclusively to the manuscript life cycle. As Horbach and Halffman (2020, p.4) have argued, such infrastructural systems of classification and standards constitute invisible mediators of action establishing templates () by which performances are compared and which define what one enactment is a performance of (ibid). The first possibility is the short decision path from "Manuscript Consultation Started" directly to "Editor Decision Complete". Additionally, source and target vertices were inserted to make start and end of the process visible in plots. sharing sensitive information, make sure youre on a federal The reviewer comments were very helpful to improve the quality of our work, and also the editor was helpful and responsive. The disintegrated network consisted of eleven isolated components, of which 10 were consisting of three vertices or less and one component with 22 vertices, containing the decisions (see Supplementary Material). Share Improve this answer Follow answered Jul 2, 2014 at 10:14 user18118 21 1 Add a comment 0 Subscribe and get curated content that will give impetus to your research paper. On occasion, particularly if the editors feel that additional technical expertise is needed to make a decision, they may obtain advice from additional reviewers. Decline publication, typically on grounds of either there being insufficient support for the conclusions or a reassessment of the level of interest or advance in light of the reviewers' comments. PLOS Sustainability and Transformation We focus our analysis on editorial peer review, that is, processes related to editorial selection, management and decision making. This is exactly the reason why the digital infrastructure allows for the investigation of its users in so many different ways. We do this by comparing the model laid out in the patent for the infrastructure (Plotkin, 2009) with the empirical data generated by the infrastructure. How long time should we wait for editor decision on a manuscript? and Recently, it has been established that in a minimal case, the peer review process is comprised of postulation, consultation, decision and administration. Nevertheless, our approach leads to methodological questions of digital inquiries. You could ask how soon they think they will answer, or give a deadline yourself, warning them that, after that deadline without having heard, you will submit the text to another publisher. Nature paper - Manuscript timeline : r/labrats - reddit Receive industry news, advice from editors & gallerists, exclusive deadlines, entry to the best images occasions and more on a weekly basis. Digital infrastructures such as editorial management systems allow for processing data about the submission, evaluation and decision of manuscripts in novel ways, taking particularly the velocity, role specificity and consistence of the peer review process into account. To the best of our knowledge, our analysis is one of the very few quantitative analyses of these processes. However, based on our analysis, we explore what can be known from editorial management systems and in what ways decisions jointly emerge from editorial decision and structures provided by the infrastructure. HHS Vulnerability Disclosure, Help But, as Schendzielorz and Reinhart (2020) recently have pointed out, editorial work can also partly be considered as administrative, taking into account that peer review takes place in an organizational setting (ibid., p.18). Algorithms as Culture: Some Tactics for the Ethnography of Algorithmic Systems, Handbook of New Media: Social Shaping and Social Consequences of ICTs, Online Editorial Management-Systeme und die Produktion wissenschaftlicher Fachzeitschriften, Open Access und Digitalisierung aus der Sicht von Wissenschaftsverlagen, Wissenschaftliches Publizieren: Zwischen Digitalisierung, Leistungsmessung, konomisierung und medialer Beobachtung, Online Collaboration: Scientists and the Social Network, Editorial Peer Review: Its Strengths and Weaknesses. It has core editorial offices across the United States, continental Europe, and Asia under the international scientific publishing company Springer Nature. The data stem from the editorial management system eJournalPress and the focal data used here are the history-information of 14,392 manuscript files referring to 17,109 manuscript versions processed in the years 2011 and 2015 in the infrastructure for four of the publishers journals, which depict the manuscript life cycle from the infrastructures point of view. Asked by Sanjay Karna A pre-screening of our data showed that the first round of peer review differs from the subsequent ones.