R1 should have declined to review due to conflict of interest. I have only ever submitted one paper, but it is currently "under review", after being "with editor" for less than a week. I think that under consideration may significate under review through several time steps according to the revision process. Under Review 2017-11-08 Under Editor Review 2017-11-08 What was the decision finally? My Frontiers can be accessed in the top-right corner of your browser after logging in. Manuscript reviews take anywhere betwen 90–180 days for the first review. 4월 13일 엘스비어(Elsevier) 저널에 원고를 투고했습니다. Decision in process - The handling editor has entered a decision but the decision is not yet finalized and has not been sent to the authors. It means the editor has it. Members of the Board may also take responsibility for key activities linked to the journal, for example the Book review editor or Section Editor (such as Section Editor for Systematic Reviews ) . Editor disagrees with referee and decides to handle it 2. There are two different types of review: In Review and Under Review. Just to give you an example, in the Journal of Organic Chemistry, when you submit an article, reviewers can select one of 4 options: accept, accept with minor revisions, reconsider after major revisions, and reject. Or it means the editor has sent it back to the referees and they haven't all agreed to re-review it yet. Reviewer R1 and possibly the Editor as well seem to have behaved inappropriately. The review process. The paper will be send for another refereeing round 3.Editor handles the paper from the start, no referees. After you’ve submitted the required personal information and facial check, it’s time for us to review. Until a paper is accepted, it can be subject to further review. Rejected Rejected You are wrong. I had an article on Theoretical and applied climatology. Unfortunately, referees can be slow, the editor is probably going to give them until after the first of the year. Peer Review Process 324311 Revisions required Author submits revised manuscript Author submits article Article assessed by editor Sent to reviewers Reviews assessed by editor Accepted Publication Production Further review needed? To access the paper and deliver your review, click on the link in the invitation email you received which will bring you to the submission/reviewing system. Specific questions: A. Best guess: reviews came in after all this time but were inconclusive, and "editor assigned" is the default state when needing to get more reviews and no reviewer has actually been assigned.In ScholarOne this would be like having it set to require 2 reviews, then when the 2 reviews come in, changing it to require 3. Editor of a journal asked for "Major Revision" for a submitted paper, after submitting revised paper it went for the review, after that the status shows "with Editor" for some time. However, Editor-in-Chief may request additional review or comments on the revised paper by members of editorial board if it seems necessary. I am editor in a journal, it would say decision in process if the editor just accepted the referee decision. In the case of major revisions it means that the paper will definitely be re-reviewed, as the editors are generally not qualified to evaluate the revisions. London Review of Books editor Mary-Kay Wilmers steps down after 30 years. After waiting 8 months, still, it was " With Editor". If you are waiting considerably longer to receive a decision from the Editor than the average review speed indicates, you can contact the Editor. Required reviews complete - Some or all assigned reviewers have completed their reviews. “Under Review”: The paper has been assigned to the reviewers and is in the process of review. If "Pending Recommendation" comes immediately after "Under Review", then the paper was never sent to the reviewers and it will either be desk rejected, or in some rare cases the editor wants the authors to make some changes before the paper is sent out for review. Under editor evaluation means three things: 1. – Alex Becker Jul 23 '13 at 0:08 @AlexBecker there are plenty of different web submission software out there… some of those don't allow you to see the difference between “with editor” and ”with reviewers”, and some do – F'x Jul 23 '13 at 6:51 이후 10월 19일에는 ‘Under editor evaluation’ 그리고 10월 22일에는 ‘Decision in process’가 됐습니다. To save the efforts of authors we only provide review reports after receiving all reports and making a decision. You can get some extra insight if you know how long the paper was in each stage. A2A. 저널 '기생충 및 벡터(Parasites & Vectors)'에 논문을 제출하였습니다. How to log in and access your review. 이후 원고 상태가 다음과 같습니다.11/26 제출(submission) 11/27 편집자 배정(Editor assigned) 12/3 검토 중(Under review) 12/4 리뷰어 배정(Reviewers assigned) 왜 ‘검토 중’으로 바뀐 바로 다음 날, 다시 ‘리뷰어 배정’으로 바뀌었을까요? The reviewing editor might select to review articles perceived to be of greater or timelier value to the journal itself, which may increase the speed of the review. With editor (Editor evaluation step) Under review (Your paper is sent for referees (reviewers)) Required reviews completed (Minimum number of reviews for your article received) Editor evaluation or with editor (Editor decision for your paper based on reviewers comments) revised or rejected or recommended for resubmission based on reviews comments Or, the editor has sent it back to the referees informally, outside the tracking system. If this happened with the journal that I edited I would regard it as a rather minor ethical breach and would inform the author of my view, but not take any further action unless the offence was repeated. 다시 9월 28일 논문 상태는 ‘Under review’가 됐습니다. 4 Frontiers | Review Editor Guidelines From your loop profile you will gain access to My Frontiers (1). Hi there, It wouldn’t surprise me if it is under peer review again – this is what tends to happen with manuscripts resubmitted after major revisions. Automated reviews typically take anywhere from 5 minutes to Also in most cases, the AE will receive an e-mail to notify him that the minimum number of reviews has been received and he must submit a decision within a couple of days / week. After completing internal checks, each new submission is assigned to a Section Editor or one of the Editors-in-Chief. If your verification status is In Review, this means that your ID uploaded successfully and your submission is being reviewed automatically.. According to their method section, the authors state that they began with an initial N=9,589. Speed Journal editors try to reach decisions on papers and notify authors as quickly as possible. Sea's e-commerce revenue soared by about 160% to $2.16 billion, but the operating loss for the segment also increased 27% to $1.44 billion, the financial statements show. Accept: The Action Editor has decided that the paper is suitable for publication in its current form. In Review. シュプリンガーのジャーナルに投稿した論文のステータスが「editor invited」に変わった1ヶ月後、「editor assigned」に変わり、現在は「Under Review」になっています。「Under Review」は、編集者による初回チェックが完了し、査読に回ったということですか？ For papers 're-review after major revision', these papers are returned to corresponding authors for full revision. Under the section 'Speed' click 'Review Speed' to see the average number of weeks it takes for a manuscript to reach first and final decision. A lot of referee reports get written over the break. To contact the Editor, you must be the Corresponding Author. I think the major decision the editor will have made here is whether to send it to the same reviewers as reviewed it previously, or a new set of reviewers (who may not even agree with the last round of recommendations). Your review will be managed via an Elsevier submission system such as Editorial Manager.Elsevier journals use different submission systems so there is no one generic login link. It may be that a review report is deemed unsuitable or that the paper is directly rejected, in which case the authors may have started to respond to a report unnecessarily. This senior editor reviews the manuscript against our publication criteria and determines whether to reject or send it on to an Associate Editor for further review. In this piece, I discuss the various possible outcomes of the review process and how to respond to them. So when you resubmit with these minor revisions, the associate editor checks to make sure you've made the changes, and then accepts it without further review. My guess is that the editor felt the review(s) received were not sufficient to make a decision on. Under review - The handling editor has begun to invite peer reviewers to evaluate the submission. Once they all have agreed, it should change to "Under Review". When the editor finally found a new referee, it went "back under review." Can authors access a review report as soon as it is received, before a decision is made? A. I think @ShakeBaby might have nailed it in the "whatever" comment. After … Q. 7. peer review process and the Action Editor has decided that it would be suitable for publication after some relatively minor changes. My Frontiers is an interface that allows all Submissions, Review and Editing assignments, as well as other useful information, to be viewed in one place. The system in most Transactions lets you change the minimum number of reviews so that the status is "Under Review" rather than "with Associate Editor".