From disorganized journal data to scattered communication, there are a lot of traps journals can fall into that complicate peer review. Here are 3 ways your journal may be making peer review harder than it needs to be.
Clarinda Cerejo, editor-in-chief of Editage Insights, discusses Author Perspectives on the Academic Publishing Process, a new survey aimed at giving authors a voice in debates about the state of journal publishing.
No matter how clear your team believes your journal's author instructions to be, there's always the possibility that they're not as obvious as you think. Here are some of the most common places where journals can improve their author instructions and how.
Are you new to Scholastica or considering signing up and are wondering how you can quickly get acquainted with our peer review software? Schedule a free training!
Whether you have a journal management system or you're considering adopting one, this blog post will help you start thinking about how you can use software to keep your editorial team on track and save time.
Rather than writing out every email by hand, wouldn't it be easier to automate recurring communication? You can, with the right peer review software.
From your editorial board's vantage point, all the benefits of a scholarly journal management system are plain to see. But how can you make your stakeholders feel the same?
Scholastica manuscript decisions just got revamped. Now decision making is a simple 3-step process, including functionality for editors to edit referee comments.
The creators of Hybrid Pedagogy have sought to foster a new approach to scholarly communication, peer review, and open access publishing.
If you want to speed up peer review at your journal, reassessing your team's current process is the place to start.