What can new technology tell us about the reviewing process for journal submissions in BJET?

Abstract

New technology allows us to collect rich and voluminous data about refereeingsomething that was not possible before. In this quantitative study, we consider data about the dates of sending (1) suitable papers to BJET, (2) the papers to referees and (3) when the referees' reports are returned to the editor. To do this, we examined data from over 11 000 reports collected between 2005 (when BJET began using ScholarOne as its online editorial manager) and October 2014. We found that most of the submissions and responses were made in the earlier part of the week, with some evidence of academics (and the editor) working on Sundays. We also found modest agreement between referees on the quality of individual papers.

Timing of submissions to The Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health: Associations with the COVID‐19 pandemic and editorial decisions

“…In our study, researchers from Egypt were the most likely to submit manuscripts on weekends (26%) but researchers from China were also more likely than average. These statistics are similar to the fields of science 26,27 and information technology 28,29 . To date, no other studies have examined manuscript submission times in relation to the COVID‐19 pandemic.…”

“…These statistics are similar to the fields of science 26 , 27 and information technology. 28 , 29 To date, no other studies have examined manuscript submission times in relation to the COVID‐19 pandemic.…”

Peer choice – does reviewer self‐selection work?

“…British Journal of Educational Technology has an unusual peer-review process as it uses 'peer choice' as its means of obtaining referees (Rushby, 2009;Hartley, 2012 andHartley &Cabanac, 2015). A panel of volunteer referees is maintained by sending regular requests for reviewers to join.…”