| Title |
Editorial behaviors in peer review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-016-2601-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wei Wang, Xiangjie Kong, Jun Zhang, Zhen Chen, Feng Xia, Xianwen Wang |
| Abstract |
Editors play a critical role in the peer review system. How do editorial behaviors affect the performance of peer review? No quantitative model to date allows us to measure the influence of editorial behaviors on different peer review stages such as, manuscript distribution and final decision making. Here, we propose an agent-based model in which the process of peer review is guided mainly by the social interactions among three kinds of agents representing authors, editors and reviewers respectively. We apply this model to analyze a number of editorial behaviors such as decision strategy, number of reviewers and editorial bias on peer review. We find out that peer review outcomes are significantly sensitive to different editorial behaviors. With a small fraction (10 %) of biased editors, the quality of accepted papers declines 11 %, which indicates that effects of editorial biased behavior is worse than that of biased reviewers (7 %). While several peer review models exist, this is the first account for the study of editorial behaviors that is validated on the basis of simulation analysis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 4% |
| China | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 24 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Librarian | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 23% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 6 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 12% |
| Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 23% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 December 2023.
All research outputs
#3,543,801
of 25,097,836 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#202
of 1,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,601
of 360,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#32
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,097,836 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,867 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,718 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.