Decoding your manuscript's status in Editorial Manager Valuable insights were gained from the categorization of events into the process element categories. Surprisingly fine grained is the representation of the communication about the decision. While these technical adaptations reflect the processual or organizational demands, they may also create novel arenas for monitoring and control neither foreseen by the developers nor by organizational professionals of peer review work. round 1""nature nature metabolism. About the Editors | Nature Immunology Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher. Such heterogeneous uses influence and transform the infrastructure as an assemblage of situated digitally mediated practices (Horbach and Halffman, 2020, p.2), that is, practices which can only be understood in the context of their local usage (e.g., a specific function accomplished within the context of a specific journal). editor decision started nature Moreover, infrastructures can be seen as structures emerging from situated knowledges, a term coined by Haraway (1988) with regard to people and communities with partial perspectives. We found multiple observations for each manuscript with a stage name, a time stamp and two pseudonymized person-identity numbers (hereinafter, person-IDs), in the system originally identifying individual users assigned to it the person who triggered an event and the person affected by an event (judging by the xml-tags assigned to the information). This could indicate two possibilities. UNESCO - Wikipedia The EiC may have seen merits in your paper after all (or a fit, if that was the issue). //-->Why many editors of Nature have very poor research records?! Editage Insights is funded by Editage and endorses services provided by Editage but is editorially independent. Thus, we bypass the (to us) opaque system, but can nevertheless infer insights about the practices and implementations of the peer review process in question. Year Publication Started 2016 *Crowdsourced data. 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. Based on the Nature Methods Review Speed Feedback System, it takes editor 146.00 days to accept manuscript. Consensus decision-making or consensus process (often abbreviated to consensus) are group decision-making processes in which participants develop and decide on proposals with the aim, or requirement, of acceptance by all. At the same time, however, editorial management systems as digital infrastructures transform that process by defining sequences, ends, values and evaluation criteria, which are inscribed already in the production process of such devices (see Krger et al., 2021). The editor contacts the author with the decision. We preliminarily conclude that the partial perspective through the eyes of the digital infrastructure provides valuable insights into the peer review process, which are difficult to obtain otherwise. The editor contacts potential reviewers. Katharina is a communications expert, science communicator, non-fictional book author and now Communications Director at the foundation "Gesunde Erde - Gesunde Menschen".<br><br>While earning her doctorate, she taught with a focus on cultural and media studies at the LMU Munich. We did not categorize the source and target nodes as they were introduced throughout our analysis and not created by the system in the first place. Editorial decision making at Nature Genetics. [CDATA[> The patent as well as the digital infrastructure aim at supporting the editor in their work. All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. In the context of the editorial decision about publication, the inventors suggest: Alternatively, the decision to publish may be automated based upon a ranking of the review decisions received from the reviewers. (Plotkin, 2009, p.5). This procedure is followed by most journals. (For one manuscript, no first version was present in the inventory hence, the difference between 14,392 and 14,391 manuscripts). This is known as a rescinding. Learn more. About MDIIM | Desautels Faculty of Management - McGill University Editorial process : Springer Support In our case, the digital traces particularly point to the editors procedural choices. 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. In the patent, it says: A users role includes one or more of the following relationships between the manuscript and the associated person: author, editor, associate editor, reviewer, or staff member. (Plotkin, 2009 p.5). The patent depicts peer review as an ordered process with actions (such as sub-processes, documents and stored data) and bifurcations (see Figure 3). At the contrary, however, events triggered by authors and referees only affect events with actors assigned the same role. This means that a manuscript will usually loop through the review process more than once, depending on the editorial decisionin our case up to six times. Receive industry news, advice from editors & gallerists, exclusive deadlines, entry to the best images occasions and more on a weekly basis. Editor in Chief, Nature. Picking the right philosophy of life is a vital decision, write Massimo Pigliucci, Skye Cleary and Daniel A. Kaufman - whether your a Stoic, an Existentialist of an Aristotelian. (Manuscript under submission->Manuscript received)->Editor assigned->Manuscript under consideration->Editor Decision StartedDecision sent to author->Waiting for revision, ->Revision receivedManuscript #A1Manuscript under submission->Manuscript received->Editor assigned->Manuscript under consideration->Editor Decision Started, . [CDATA[// >