IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v8y2021i1d10.1057_s41599-021-00920-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trade-off between urgency and reduced editorial capacity affect publication speed in ecological and medical journals during 2020

Author

Listed:
  • Lucas Rodriguez Forti

    (Rua Barão de Jeremoabo)

  • Luiz A. Solino

    (Rua Engenheiro Edgar Prado Arze
    Fundação Ecotrópica)

  • Judit K. Szabo

    (Rua Barão de Jeremoabo
    Charles Darwin University)

Abstract

While the speed of publication in academic journals has decreased over time, delays in the review process can still cause frustration and damage the authors’ career. During the COVID-19 lockdown, scientists struggled to manage tasks and academic journals announced possible publication delays due to reduced editorial capacity. In this context, COVID-19 research has been somewhat paradoxical, due to societal and editorial pressures for fast publication. We hypothesised that given the urgency of disseminating pandemic-related information, articles on the topic would be published as a priority in 2020. We analysed the submission-to-publication time lag for 5790 articles published between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020 in eight ecology and eight medical journals. We also analysed patterns in the gender of first and last authors. All 16 journals were international, with relatively high impact factor (between 2.34 and 36.13) and partially or fully open access. Even though articles in general took longer to get published, the speed of publication increased in 2020, as the faster review of 419 COVID-19 articles compensated for the longer submission-to-publication time lag of non-COVID-19 publications. Manuscripts in journals with a higher impact factor and only partial open access took longer to get published during the last three years. In 2020, the ratio of articles with male and female first and last authors remained similar to that in 2019, maintaining the gender bias in scientific productivity. Female scientists, especially when they are providing maternity and other primary care, need more support for their careers, such as relief from teaching duties and adjustments on assessment criteria to access research funding. We advocate that topics besides COVID-19, particularly those that could help to solve other urgent crises, should also benefit from faster publication.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucas Rodriguez Forti & Luiz A. Solino & Judit K. Szabo, 2021. "Trade-off between urgency and reduced editorial capacity affect publication speed in ecological and medical journals during 2020," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:8:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-021-00920-9
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-021-00920-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-021-00920-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-021-00920-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leonid Tiokhin & Minhua Yan & Thomas J. H. Morgan, 2021. "Author Correction: Competition for priority harms the reliability of science, but reforms can help," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(7), pages 954-954, July.
    2. Jory Lerback & Brooks Hanson, 2017. "Journals invite too few women to referee," Nature, Nature, vol. 541(7638), pages 455-457, January.
    3. Björk, Bo-Christer & Solomon, David, 2013. "The publishing delay in scholarly peer-reviewed journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 914-923.
    4. Oecd, 2008. "DAC Peer Review of Greece," OECD Journal on Development, OECD Publishing, vol. 7(4), pages 7-93.
    5. Vincent Larivière & Chaoqun Ni & Yves Gingras & Blaise Cronin & Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 2013. "Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science," Nature, Nature, vol. 504(7479), pages 211-213, December.
    6. Janine Huisman & Jeroen Smits, 2017. "Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 633-650, October.
    7. Glenn Ellison, 2002. "The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 947-993, October.
    8. Kyle R. Myers & Wei Yang Tham & Yian Yin & Nina Cohodes & Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby & Peter Schiffer & Joseph T. Walsh & Karim R. Lakhani & Dashun Wang, 2020. "Unequal effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(9), pages 880-883, September.
    9. Jeffrey Beall, 2012. "Predatory publishers are corrupting open access," Nature, Nature, vol. 489(7415), pages 179-179, September.
    10. Paul Sebo & Jean Pascal Fournier & Claire Ragot & Pierre-Henri Gorioux & François R. Herrmann & Hubert Maisonneuve, 2019. "Factors associated with publication speed in general medical journals: a retrospective study of bibliometric data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1037-1058, May.
    11. Vivian M Nguyen & Neal R Haddaway & Lee F G Gutowsky & Alexander D M Wilson & Austin J Gallagher & Michael R Donaldson & Neil Hammerschlag & Steven J Cooke, 2015. "How Long Is Too Long in Contemporary Peer Review? Perspectives from Authors Publishing in Conservation Biology Journals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    12. Oecd, 2008. "DAC Peer Review of the Netherlands," OECD Journal on Development, OECD Publishing, vol. 7(3), pages 115-214.
    13. Adam Palayew & Ole Norgaard & Kelly Safreed-Harmon & Tue Helms Andersen & Lauge Neimann Rasmussen & Jeffrey V. Lazarus, 2020. "Pandemic publishing poses a new COVID-19 challenge," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(7), pages 666-669, July.
    14. Giuliana Viglione, 2020. "Are women publishing less during the pandemic? Here’s what the data say," Nature, Nature, vol. 581(7809), pages 365-366, May.
    15. Ádám Kun, 2020. "Time to Acceptance of 3 Days for Papers About COVID-19," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-10, June.
    16. Stan Benjamens & Robert A. Pol & Vincent E. Meijer & Martijn P. D. Haring, 2021. "Peer review during demanding times: maintain rigorous standards," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6115-6117, July.
    17. Oecd, 2008. "DAC Peer Review of Canada," OECD Journal on Development, OECD Publishing, vol. 8(4), pages 263-387.
    18. Leonid Tiokhin & Minhua Yan & Thomas J. H. Morgan, 2021. "Competition for priority harms the reliability of science, but reforms can help," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(7), pages 857-867, July.
    19. Ruomeng Cui & Hao Ding & Feng Zhu, 2020. "Gender Inequality in Research Productivity During the COVID-19 Pandemic," Papers 2006.10194, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    20. Peter Kareiva & Michelle Marvier & Sabrina West & Joy Hornisher, 2002. "Slow-moving journals hinder conservation efforts," Nature, Nature, vol. 420(6911), pages 15-15, November.
    21. Guang Yu & Xiao-Hong Wang & Da-Ren Yu, 2005. "The influence of publication delays on impact factors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 64(2), pages 235-246, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maciej J. Mrowinski & Agata Fronczak & Piotr Fronczak & Olgica Nedic & Aleksandar Dekanski, 2020. "The hurdles of academic publishing from the perspective of journal editors: a case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 115-133, October.
    2. Besim Bilalli & Rana Faisal Munir & Alberto Abelló, 2021. "A framework for assessing the peer review duration of journals: case study in computer science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 545-563, January.
    3. Lokman Tutuncu, 2023. "All-pervading insider bias alters review time in Turkish university journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3743-3791, June.
    4. Zhao, Zhi-Dan & Chen, Jiahao & Lu, Yichuan & Zhao, Na & Jiang, Dazhi & Wang, Bing-Hong, 2021. "Dynamic patterns of open review process," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 582(C).
    5. Liu, Meijun & Zhang, Ning & Hu, Xiao & Jaiswal, Ajay & Xu, Jian & Chen, Hong & Ding, Ying & Bu, Yi, 2022. "Further divided gender gaps in research productivity and collaboration during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from coronavirus-related literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    6. Minxian Zheng & Kuangji Zhao & Shikui Zhao & Yantong Zhang, 2020. "Effecting variables of journal’s ranking in forestry field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 135-151, October.
    7. Constantin Bürgi & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2022. "The influence of Covid-19 on publications in economics: bibliometric evidence from five working paper series," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5175-5189, September.
    8. Brad M. Barber & Wei Jiang & Adair Morse & Manju Puri & Heather Tookes & Ingrid M. Werner, 2021. "What Explains Differences in Finance Research Productivity during the Pandemic?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 76(4), pages 1655-1697, August.
    9. Püttmann, Vitus & Thomsen, Stephan L. & Trunzer, Johannes, 2020. "Zur Relevanz von Ausstattungsunterschieden für Forschungsleistungsvergleiche: Ein Diskussionsbeitrag für die Wirtschaftswissenschaften in Deutschland," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-679, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät, revised Mar 2021.
    10. Janine Huisman & Jeroen Smits, 2017. "Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 633-650, October.
    11. Dan Tian & Xin Liu & Jiang Li, 2024. "Accelerated acceptance time for preprint submissions: a comparative analysis based on PubMed," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 3787-3807, July.
    12. Shradha Kundra & Naman Sreen & Rohit Dwivedi, 2023. "Impact of Work from Home and Family Support on Indian Women’s Work Productivity During COVID-19," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 48(1), pages 39-53, March.
    13. Jian Gao & Yian Yin & Kyle R. Myers & Karim R. Lakhani & Dashun Wang, 2021. "Potentially long-lasting effects of the pandemic on scientists," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-6, December.
    14. ederico Bianchi & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2022. "Can transparency undermine peer review? A simulation model of scientist behavior under open peer review [Reviewing Peer Review]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(5), pages 791-800.
    15. Sun, Zhuanlan & Clark Cao, C. & Ma, Chao & Li, Yiwei, 2023. "The academic status of reviewers predicts their language use," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    16. Walters, Cyrill & Mehl, Graeme G. & Piraino, Patrizio & Jansen, Jonathan D. & Kriger, Samantha, 2022. "The impact of the pandemic-enforced lockdown on the scholarly productivity of women academics in South Africa," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    17. Lin Zhang & Yuanyuan Shang & Ying Huang & Gunnar Sivertsen, 2022. "Gender differences among active reviewers: an investigation based on publons," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 145-179, January.
    18. Stephen A Gallo & Afton S Carpenter & Scott R Glisson, 2013. "Teleconference versus Face-to-Face Scientific Peer Review of Grant Application: Effects on Review Outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-9, August.
    19. Wenxuan Shi & Renli Wu, 2024. "Women’s strength in science: exploring the influence of female participation on research impact and innovation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 4529-4551, July.
    20. Sorana-Alexandra Constantinescu & Maria-Henriete Pozsar, 2022. "Was This Supposed to Be on the Test? Academic Leadership, Gender and the COVID-19 Pandemic in Denmark, Hungary, Romania, and United Kingdom," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:8:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-021-00920-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.