Does Publication in Top-Tier Journals Affect Reviewer Behavior?

  title={Does Publication in Top-Tier Journals Affect Reviewer Behavior?},
  author={Lonnie W. Aarssen and Christopher J. Lortie and Amber E. Budden and Julia Koricheva and Roosa Leimu and Tom Tregenza},
  journal={PLoS ONE},
We show that when ecologists act as reviewers their reported rejection rates recommended for manuscripts increases with their publication frequency in high impact factor journals. Rejection rate however does not relate to reviewer age. These results indicate that the likelihood of getting a paper accepted for publication may depend upon factors in addition to scientific merit. Multiple reviewer selection for a given manuscript therefore should consider not only appropriate expertise, but also… Expand

Figures, Tables, and Topics from this paper

Are conference special issues worthwhile
Use citation rates to assess the performance of papers published in special issues, while bearing in mind that citation rates are not the be-all-and-end-all indicator of scientific merit. Expand
The “peer-review” process in biomedical journals: characteristics of “Elite” reviewers
The profile of the “elite” reviewers has been described, but further studies are warranted to better identify their main characteristics. Expand
Agreement between thoracic reviewers for the European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery.
  • G. Varela, E. Rendina
  • Medicine
  • European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery
  • 2014
Associate editors play the hard role of gatekeepers, opening or closing the way for a final approval of manuscripts by the Editor-in-Chief, and are exposed to making mistakes in both ways: either accepting not-so-good papers or rejecting manuscripts that are finally approved and highly cited in other journals. Expand
Bias in the research literature and conflict of interest: an issue for publishers, editors, reviewers and authors, and it is not just about the money.
  • S. Young
  • Psychology, Medicine
  • Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN
  • 2009
It is argued that there is no entirely satisfactory way of dealing with COIs, but that all researchers should be aware of the issues discussed here to minimize the extent to which COIs can distort the scientific literature. Expand
Peer Review: From “Sacred Ideals” to “Profane Realities”
Peer review, a socially structured process of evaluating scholarly and scientific performance, is a ubiquitous condition of role performance in the professoriate and central to the production ofExpand
Negotiation on the assessment of research articles with academic reviewers: application of peer-review approach of teaching
This study provides an insight into the dominant negotiation processes that occur between the authors of research articles and academic reviewers at the peer reviewing stage. Data of reviewersExpand
Tendencies in medical publications
The trends of research design in publications from high-impact medical journals, conducted by searching the 2011 electronic publications of the journals, can have implications in Evidence-Based Medicine programs. Expand
Final outcome of articles rejected after revision at Obstetrics & Gynecology: An investigation
In multivariable analyses, manuscripts rejected after an invitation for revision were more likely to be original research and to have higher‐than‐average reviewer quality scores compared to those accepted after revision. Expand
Subspecialty Influence on Scientific Peer Review for an Obstetrics and Gynecology Journal With a High Impact Factor.
peer review quality differs based on obstetrics and gynecology subspecialty and reviewer experience have implications for manuscript rejection recommendation, which is pivotal to maintaining a rigorous manuscript selection process. Expand
El proceso de peer-review en las Revistas Biomédicas: Cualidades de los Revisores de Excelencia
El reto todavia pendiente, para los editores and para las sociedades cientificas medicas en general, sigue siendo conseguir la excelencia dentro del proceso de “peer-review” and lograr that this importante trabajo sea valorado and reconocido como un merito academico. Expand


Bang for Your Buck: Rejection Rates and Impact Factors in Ecological Journals
When choosing where to submit their research for publication, most ecologists are concerned with journal impact factor, but they are also concerned with the likelihood that their manuscripts will beExpand
Publication and Rejection among Successful Ecologists
It is found that the ecologists with the highest number of publications also suffered the largest proportion of manuscript rejections, and it is shown that publication success and manuscript rejection are definitely not exclusive. Expand
Publication rejection among ecologists
Few people enjoy rejection under any circumstances, but if you are a scientist and you receive a rejection letter from a journal, then, is it time to abandon research, or do all scientists experienceExpand
Systematic Variation in Reviewer Practice According to Country and Gender in the Field of Ecology and Evolution
The characteristics of referees and the potential subsequent effects on the peer-review process are an important consideration for science since the integrity of the system depends on the appropriateExpand
Publication bias and merit in ecology
Bias, or any set of factors that influence the general expression of merit, is common in science and is an inevitable by-product of an imperfect but otherwise reasonably objective human pursuit toExpand
Suggesting or Excluding Reviewers Can Help Get Your Paper Published
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS-- According to three studies presented here last week at the Fifth International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, either suggesting or excluding reviewers canExpand
REVIEW: Questionnaires in ecology: a review of past use and recommendations for best practice
1. Questionnaires, or social surveys, are used increasingly as a means of collecting data in ecology. We present a critical review of their use and give recommendations for good practice. 2. WeExpand
The politics of publication
Authors, reviewers and editors must act to protect the quality of research in the face of threats to research integrity. Expand
Quantifying Scholarly Impact: IQp Versus the Hirsch h
The best papers are the boldest