Review times in peer review: quantitative analysis of editorial workflows
arXiv:1508.01134 · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1871-z
Abstract
We examine selected aspects of peer review and suggest possible improvements. To this end, we analyse a dataset containing information about 300 papers submitted to the Biochemistry and Biotechnology section of the Journal of the Serbian Chemical Society. After separating the peer review process into stages that each review has to go through, we use a weighted directed graph to describe it in a probabilistic manner and test the impact of some modifications of the editorial policy on the efficiency of the whole process.
References in corpus (1)
Cited by in corpus (9)
- Artificial intelligence in peer review: How can evolutionary computation support journal editors?
- On Performance of Peer Review for Academic Journals: Analysis Based on Distributed Parallel System
- Day of the week effect in paper submission/acceptance/rejection to/in/by peer review journals
- Correlations between submission and acceptance of papers in peer review journals
- Day of the week effect in paper submission/acceptance/rejection to/in/by peer review journals. II. An ARCH econometric-like modeling
- Seasonal Entropy, Diversity and Inequality Measures of Submitted and Accepted Papers Distributions In Peer-Reviewed Journals
- Which Review Aspect Has a Greater Impact on the Duration of Open Peer Review in Multiple Rounds? -- Evidence from Nature Communications
- Efficiency in managing peer-review of scientific manuscripts -- editors' perspective
- On Novel Peer Review System for Academic Journals: Experimental Study Based on Social Computing