[CDATA[// >For authors | Nature Communications There is not yet sufficient data to conclude which form of peer review—transparent or double-blind—is the most conducive to rigorous and unbiased science reporting. Websubmissions system for Nature Communications. We found a small but significant association between journal tier and review type (p value < 0.001, Cramer’s V = 0.054, df = 2). Which proportions of papers are accepted for publication under SBPR and DBPR? Another report found that the authors of submissions to the American Journal of Public Health were in fact recognizable in around half of the cases [3]. One click sign-in with your social accounts. //-->nature子刊这个投稿状态能看出什么来吗~ - 小木虫论坛 and transmitted securely. This article aims to give authors an idea of the different statuses that the tracking system displays and what each status means. WebAuthors who wish to appeal an editorial decision should submit a formal letter to the journal by contacting commseng@nature.com. If authors choose DBPR, their details (names and affiliations) are removed from the manuscript files, and it is the authors’ responsibility to ensure their own anonymity throughout the text and beyond (e.g. So far I have not received any email which tells rejection. In our case, this analysis was hampered by the lack of an independent measure of quality, by potential confounders such as potential editor bias towards the review model or author characteristics, and by the lack of controlled experiments in which the same paper is reviewed under both SBPR and DBPR, or in which DBPR is compulsory, thus eliminating the effect of bias towards the review model. We observed a trend in which the OTR rate for both DBPR and SBPR papers decreases as the prestige of the institution groups decreases, and we tested for the significance of this. [CDATA[// >