You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently the peer-review verdicts are pre-set in the system as 'accept', 'minor revisions', 'major revisions' and 'decline'. It would be very useful to be able to rename these as needed as the OLHJ currently has 'accept', 'revisions required', 'revise and resubmit' and 'decline' instead - this current set-up makes it clear that if revise and resubmit is selected, the article is being recommended for further peer-review, and as such hasn't yet actually passed peer-review. However, with the existing categories in Janeway there is no clear and unambiguous 'resubmit for review' verdict, meaning that there may be confusion over whether an article has officially passed peer review or not.
Simply being able to rename these categories would be a useful extra feature to allow journals to fine-tune the system for when coming across from another editorial peer-review workflow set-up. Thanks for your help.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
with the existing categories in Janeway there is no clear and unambiguous 'resubmit for review' verdict
This is not accidental. These are reviewer recommendations not editor decisions. We don't ask the reviewers to decide if an article requires additional review, that is the editors decision. As an aside "resubmit for review" is ambiguous and causes people to submit new papers to the journal so there are duplicates.
Currently the peer-review verdicts are pre-set in the system as 'accept', 'minor revisions', 'major revisions' and 'decline'. It would be very useful to be able to rename these as needed as the OLHJ currently has 'accept', 'revisions required', 'revise and resubmit' and 'decline' instead - this current set-up makes it clear that if revise and resubmit is selected, the article is being recommended for further peer-review, and as such hasn't yet actually passed peer-review. However, with the existing categories in Janeway there is no clear and unambiguous 'resubmit for review' verdict, meaning that there may be confusion over whether an article has officially passed peer review or not.
Simply being able to rename these categories would be a useful extra feature to allow journals to fine-tune the system for when coming across from another editorial peer-review workflow set-up. Thanks for your help.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: