Review process of research paper

Grad school survival advice from Nick Feamster and Alex Gray

Decisions are quicker, and editorial criteria can be made uniform across disciplines. The judgement about which papers will interest a broad readership is made by Nature 's editors, not its referees. One reason is because each referee sees only a tiny fraction of the papers submitted and is deeply knowledgeable about one field, whereas the editors, who see all the papers submitted, can have a broader perspective and a wider context from which to view the paper.

Authors should use the formatting guide section to ensure that the level, length and format particularly the layout of figures and tables and any Supplementary Information conforms with Nature 's requirements, at submission and each revision stage. This will reduce delays. Manuscripts should be submitted via our online manuscript submission system. Although optional, the cover letter is an excellent opportunity to briefly discuss the importance of the submitted work and why it is appropriate for the journal.

Please avoid repeating information that is already present in the abstract and introduction. The cover letter is not shared with the referees, and should be used to provide confidential information such as conflicts of interest and to declare any related work that is in press or submitted elsewhere.

How to Read, Take Notes On and Understand Journal Articles - Essay Tips

All Nature editors report to the Editor of Nature , who sets Nature 's publication policies. Authors submitting to Nature do so on the understanding that they agree to these policies. The first stage for a newly submitted Article is that the editorial staff consider whether to send it for peer-review. On submission, the manuscript is assigned to an editor covering the subject area, who seeks informal advice from scientific advisors and editorial colleagues, and who makes this initial decision. The criteria for a paper to be sent for peer-review are that the results seem novel, arresting illuminating, unexpected or surprising , and that the work described has both immediate and far-reaching implications.

The initial judgement is not a reflection on the technical validity of the work described, or on its importance to people in the same field. Special attention is paid by the editors to the readability of submitted material. Editors encourage authors in highly technical disciplines to provide a slightly longer summary paragraph that descries clearly the basic background to the work and how the new results have affected the field, in a way that enables nonspecialist readers to understand what is being described.

Editors also strongly encourage authors in appropriate disciplines to include a simple schematic summarizing the main conclusion of the paper, which can be published with the paper as Supplementary Information.

Such figures can be particularly helpful to nonspecialist readers of cell, molecular and structural biology papers. Once the decision has been made to peer-review the paper, the choice of referees is made by the editor who has been assigned the manuscript, who will be handling other papers in the same field, in consultation with editors handling submissions in related fields when necessary. Most papers are sent to two or three referees, but some are sent to more or, occasionally, just to one. Referees are chosen for the following reasons:.

Peer review - Wikipedia

Although Nature 's editors themselves judge whether a paper is likely to interest readers outside its own immediate field, referees often give helpful advice, for example if the work described is not as significant as the editors thought or has undersold its significance. Some potential referees may be engaged in competing work that could influence their opinion. To avoid such conflicts of interest, Nature requires potential referees to disclose any professional and commercial competing interests before undertaking to review a paper, and requires referees not to copy papers or to circulate them to un-named colleagues.

All referees agree to Nature 's conditions before Nature sends them a manuscript to assess. Although Nature editors go to every effort to ensure manuscripts are assessed fairly, Nature is not responsible for the conduct of its referees. Nature welcomes authors' suggestions for suitable independent referees with their contact details , but editors are free to decide themselves who to use as referees.

Nature editors will normally honour requests that a paper not be sent to one or two but no more competing groups for review. Why choose multiple peer reviewers? Your paper peer review will be conducted by expert reviewers who have expertise in your field of study and experience reviewing for high-impact international journals.

Editorial criteria and processes

You will undergo peer review in only 7 days compared to months of waiting for peer review by a journal. You can choose multiple peer reviewers, up to 3, to review your paper. I am very satisfied with your peer review service. The fact that we were able to receive a peer review of experts who are experienced journal reviewers was very beneficial for us. Publication Support catered to a special form of Peer Review service especially for me. I will continue to work with Publication Support and Enago for all my future assignments.

I feel it is very important to take outsider opinion and critical comments to make your manuscript rejection resistant. Hence, I chose the peer-review service offered by them which was excellent. I was surprised by the number and quality of comments that I received.


  • Introduction to peer review?
  • introduction of thesis about fraternity;
  • editing research paper checklist.
  • write rationale research paper.
  • write thesis statement.
  • How small changes to a paper can help to smooth the review process.

Although I did take some time to incorporate all the suggestions, it was well worth the time! I was initially scared after I received the peer review report. There were a lot of changes suggested. It felt as if I might have to rewrite a lot. But once I actually made the changes, the result was brilliant. It actually got published in my intended journal! Professor - at Juntendo University. All at one place, it gave a lot of insights in improving my paper.

Also, one more thing that was great about it was that it was written in simple English so I could understand it very well and I could make most changes suggested. Journal editors typically look at hundreds of manuscripts a year. One of the first items that editors will look at is the cover letter, and they may not get further than the cover letter if the study does not seem interesting enough.

Therefore, it is imperative that authors craft a well-written cover letter that highlights the significance and strength of their research as well as provides a good reason why the manuscript is a good fit for the journal. Editors will then go through the abstract and may even skim through the introduction, figures and tables, or other sections of the paper to determine whether the manuscript passes their quality threshold. Generally, a minimum of 2 peer reviewers up to 6 are chosen for the peer review.

Peer reviewers are ideally experts in their field.

Journals usually build a pool of peer reviewers that have a good track record of producing high-quality reviews. Or they may scan the bibliography to identify potential reviewers or contact researchers they met at conferences and seminars. Editors have to be careful to select reviewers who have sufficient subject matter expertise to do justice to the manuscript. Therefore, highly technical papers or papers from niche subject areas may take longer to review, because it may take editors some time to locate appropriate reviewers.

Some journals give authors the option of recommending preferred and non-preferred reviewers. Authors would do well to take advantage of this option if available as it can expedite the review process, since it saves the journal time in looking for reviewers. Furthermore, studies have found that author recommended peer reviewers tend to recommend acceptance more often than journal recommended reviewers. The peer review is completed once all the reviewers send the journal a detailed report with their comments on the manuscript and their recommendation.

Typically, journals ask reviewers to complete their reviews within weeks. Final decision The journal editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision. The following are the most common decisions that are made:. The first option accept without any changes is rare. The second decision accept with minor revisions is typically the best outcome authors should hope for. Once a journal rejects a paper outright, authors are well advised not to resubmit to the same journal.

If the journal wanted to reconsider the paper, they would have issued a conditional rejection. An outright rejection means that the journal thinks the paper will not meet its publication standards or interests even after heavy revisions. Do peer reviewers and editors always agree on what's worthy of publication?


  • smoking should not be permitted in restaurants essay!
  • essay on julius caesar themes!
  • 1. in what situations are compare-and-contrast essays effective!
  • The Paper Reviewing Process!
  • scholarship with essay.
  • The Paper Reviewing Process | How to Do Great Research.

In reality, reviewers tend to recommend acceptance more often than rejection. Click here to view a short presentation on this topic! You're looking to give wings to your academic career and publication journey. We like that! Why don't we give you complete access!

admin