首页> 外文期刊>Biological Conservation >Who are our reviewers and how do they review? The profile and work of Biological Conservation reviewers
【24h】

Who are our reviewers and how do they review? The profile and work of Biological Conservation reviewers

机译:谁是我们的评论家以及他们如何审查? 生物保护审查人员的简介和工作

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

To improve the present system of peer review of scientific papers, editors and publishers need to know: Who are the reviewers? How frequently do they decline or accept and complete their reviews? And what factors affect their willingness to accept reviews? We analyzed the peer review process for 1590 manuscripts submitted to the journal Biological Conservation during the period 2014-2015. Overall, 11,840 review invitations were sent to 6555 different reviewers. 60% of invited reviewers were from four large English-speaking countries United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada-While only 1% or fewer of invited reviewers were from certain populous countries such as India and China. Considering only the first round of reviews, we found that, on average, editors invited 6.7 reviewers per manuscript, and reviewers accepted 37% of invitations. Reviewer gender, seniority, and academic productivity had no effect on acceptance rate. Reviewers from China accepted a higher proportion of invitations than did reviewers from any other country. Individuals who had accepted an invitation were more likely to accept a second invitation for a different manuscript, and reviewers who were fast with one review tended to be fast with the review of the next manuscript. Over 90% of reviewers completed their reviews, and most reviews were submitted on time. Editors should consider expanding the diversity of reviewers they invite, and particularly invite more scientists from under-represented countries. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:要改进科学论文的对等审查系统,编辑和出版商需要知道:谁是审稿人?他们如何衰落或接受并完成他们的评论?什么是对接受评论的意愿影响他们的意愿?我们分析了在2014 - 2015年期间提交给“生物保护期刊”生物保护的1590个稿件的同行评审过程。总体而言,11,840名审查邀请函被发送到6555个不同的审稿人员。 60%的受邀审查员来自美国,英国,澳大利亚和加拿大的四个大型英语国家 - 虽然只有1%或更少的邀请审稿人来自印度和中国等某些人口众多国家。只有在第一轮评论中,我们发现,平均而言,编辑每手稿邀请6.7审核员,审稿人接受了37%的邀请函。审稿人性别,资历和学术生产力对接受率没有影响。来自中国的评论者比任何其他国家的审稿人都接受了更高比例的邀请函。接受邀请的个人更有可能接受对不同稿件的第二邀请,并迅速审查的审查员往往快速审查下一个稿件。超过90%的审核人员完成了他们的评论,大多数评论都按时提交。编辑应考虑扩大他们邀请的审稿人的多样性,特别邀请来自代表性国内的更多科学家。 (c)2016 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号