Correlations between submission and acceptance of papers in peer review journals

AbstractThis paper provides a comparative study about seasonal influence on editorial decisions for papers submitted to two peer review journals. We distinguish a specialized one, the Journal of the Serbian Chemical Society (JSCS) and an interdisciplinary one, Entropy. Dates of electronic submission for about 600 papers to JSCS and 2500 to Entropy have been recorded over 3 recent years. Time series of either accepted or rejected papers are subsequently analyzed. We take either editors or authors view points into account, thereby considering magnitudes and probabilities. In this sample, it is found that there are distinguishable peaks and dips in the time series, demonstrating preferred months for the submission of papers. It is also found that papers are more likely accepted if they are submitted during a few specific months—these depending on the journal. The probability of having a rejected paper also appears to be seasonally biased. In view of clarifying reports with contradictory findings, we discuss previously proposed conjectures for such effects, like holiday effects and the desk rejection by editors. We conclude that, in this sample, the type of journal, specialized or multidisciplinary, seems to be the drastic criterion for distinguishing the outcomes rates.

[1]  Olgica Nedic,et al.  Peer Review of Reviewers: The Author's Perspective , 2018, Publ..

[2]  Lowell L. Hargens,et al.  Scholarly Consensus and Journal Rejection Rates. , 1988 .

[3]  Marcel Ausloos,et al.  Day of the week effect in paper submission/acceptance/rejection to/in/by peer review journals , 2016, ArXiv.

[4]  Marcel Ausloos,et al.  Efficiency in managing peer-review of scientific manuscripts - editors' perspective , 2019, ArXiv.

[5]  Marcel Ausloos,et al.  Review time in peer review: quantitative analysis and modelling of editorial workflows , 2016, Scientometrics.

[6]  Michael Schreiber,et al.  Seasonal bias in editorial decisions for a physics journal: you should write when you like, but submit in July , 2012, Learn. Publ..

[7]  J. R. Cole,et al.  Chance and consensus in peer review. , 1981, Science.

[8]  I. David P. Doane Ii. Lori E. Seward,et al.  Applied statistics in business and economics , 2006 .

[9]  Giulia Rotundo,et al.  Black–Scholes–Schrödinger–Zipf–Mandelbrot model framework for improving a study of the coauthor core score , 2014 .

[10]  Claudiu Herteliu,et al.  Day of the week submission effect for accepted papers in Physica A, PLOS ONE, Nature and Cell , 2018, Scientometrics.

[11]  Marcel Ausloos,et al.  Day of the week effect in paper submission/acceptance/rejection to/in/by peer review journals. II. An ARCH econometric-like modeling , 2016, ArXiv.

[12]  Aleksandar Dekanski,et al.  A survey on the Journal of the Serbian Chemical Society publishing policies: On the occasion of the 80th volume , 2015 .

[13]  Carsten K. W. De Dreu,et al.  Write when hot — submit when not: seasonal bias in peer review or acceptance? , 2010, Learn. Publ..

[14]  J F Waeckerle,et al.  Reliability of editors' subjective quality ratings of peer reviews of manuscripts. , 1998, JAMA.

[15]  Marcel Ausloos,et al.  Artificial intelligence in peer review: How can evolutionary computation support journal editors? , 2017, PloS one.