Does publication in top-tier journals affect reviewer behavior?
Public Library of Science
© 2009 Aarssen et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
We show that when ecologists act as reviewers their reported rejection rates recommended for manuscripts increases with their publication frequency in high impact factor journals. Rejection rate however does not relate to reviewer age. These results indicate that the likelihood of getting a paper accepted for publication may depend upon factors in addition to scientific merit. Multiple reviewer selection for a given manuscript therefore should consider not only appropriate expertise, but also reviewers that have variable publication experience with a range of different journals to ensure balanced treatment. Interestingly since age did not relate to rejection rates, more senior scientists are not necessarily more jaded in reviewing practices.
This research was conducted as part of a working group, ‘The role of publication-related biases in ecology’, supported by the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS; http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/), funded by NSF (Grant no. DEB-0072909). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
This is the final version of the article. Available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.
Vol. 4, e6283
PubMed Central ID
Place of publication