When selecting an online submission and manuscript tracking system, most academic journal editors focus on the needs of their team. But what about authors and reviewers?
Your peer review system can either positively or negatively impact how scholars think about your publication. If you make authors and reviewers slog through a confusing system—they may decide they don’t want to work with you again! That’s why it’s imperative to assess software from the eyes of all users.
A cohesive platform is a must for a cohesive peer review experience
First things first, centralized tools and systems result in the most streamlined peer review processes. If your editors are managing submissions through a hodgepodge of software like email, DropBox, and spreadsheets, it can lead to workflow headaches. In general, if peer review feels scattered for your editorial team, it’s likely the same or worse for reviewers and authors who aren’t used to your processes.
No reviewer likes having to log into DropBox to view a manuscript and then having to dig through their email to find the right person to send their referee report. And no author likes having to create a folder in their email inbox to keep track of revision emails. Such situations can make your publication appear unprofessional. For the sake of everyone involved in peer review at your journal, you should seek an editorial management system that has all the tools you need in a central location.
Authors and reviewers are infrequent visitors to your journal - they can’t “learn” your system
When selecting peer review software, all editorial teams should follow the guiding principle that authors and reviewers do not have the time to learn the intricacies of a complex system.
Again, authors and reviewers do not have the time to learn how to use complex systems.
Therefore, you should seek to manage peer review via an intuitive platform that authors and reviewers can easily access and work within. Common software issues that can make for an unpleasant peer review experience for authors and reviewers include:
Clunky interface: If your peer review system looks and functions like a circa 2000 database, that’s problematic. Your editors may be used to multi-click processes and lengthy sidebars, but authors and reviewers aren’t. Try testing out your system from the perspective of authors and reviewers, including signing up for an account, submitting a manuscript, and responding to a review request. If you struggle to complete those common actions within a few minutes or generally find it unpleasant, you can be sure authors and reviewers will experience the same frustrations.
Lack of status updates: Authors and reviewers like getting notification emails like submission status updates and reminders to complete review assignments. You should be able to send automated status updates to authors and reviewers from your peer review system. And, authors and reviewers should be able to access those updates both within your peer review system and via email.
Difficulty keeping communication straight: Your peer review system should make it easy for authors and reviewers to communicate with you. They should be able to contact editors within the system and have easy access to submission communication threads, ideally with the option to respond to messages both within your peer review software and via their email for convenience. For example, Scholastica’s peer review software has a feature called Discussions that makes this possible.
File version confusion: You’re bound to work with multiple versions of a manuscript file during peer review. Don’t task authors and reviewers with keeping file versions straight. Make sure your peer review system can automate file versioning.
Busy authors and reviewers need fast user support
Every author and reviewer’s worst nightmare is trying to submit a revised manuscript or referee report on time only to encounter a technical question or technical trouble. It’s important to think about this and to make sure your peer review system offers adequate user support. Authors and reviewers will get frustrated if they have to write to your editors every time they have a question. Everyone using your peer review system should have access to help documentation and technical assistance.
More tips for assessing peer review software
As you consider what will be the best peer review system for not only your editorial team but also authors and reviewers, check out Scholastica’s guide The Modern Journal: Technology and Peer Review Management, which walks through key software features to look for and common pitfalls to avoid. If you’re interested in learning more about Scholastica’s journal management software, we’d love to show you around! Click here to request a demo.
This post was originally published on (April 17, 2017) and updated on (March 14, 2019).
