Peer review admin takes ‘less than an hour’

But peer review processing firm must deal with author comments like those on ‘consenting mole rats’

February 20, 2016
Stopwatch close-up (detail)

Processing a paper submitted to a journal takes 45 to 50 minutes of work, according to the director of a company that organises peer review for publishers.

The comments by Alice Ellingham, director of Editorial Office, which handles peer review for 85 journals, add to the debate about open access and journal profit margins.

Critics have argued that publishers do little to justify their subscription fees or article processing charges because peer review is generally done by academics for free. Fees per article vary widely; article processing charges at the publisher Elsevier range from $500 to $5,000 (£350-£3,497).

Speaking in London at the Researcher to Reader conference on 16 February, Ms Ellingham presented data from three anonymised journals that outsource the organisation of peer review to her company.

Staff at her company spent more than a quarter of their time screening new submissions, while sending emails also took up a sizeable chunk of time.

The 45-50 minute figure does not include peer reviewers’ time – just the work spent organising it and other tasks such as copy-editing.

Ms Ellingham later told Times Higher Education that “we would struggle to get it much below that [45-50 minutes]”. 

Her presentation to the conference on “the unseen costs of peer review” argued that organising peer review came at a cost, not least because someone has to deal with bizarre problems and queries thrown up by authors and peer reviewers.

Justifying the use of animals in an experiment, one author told Editorial Office: “We did not need ethical approval, as the mole rats consented to participate in our studies.”

Disclosing their financial interests, another asked: “Does my mother’s pocket money count as financial assistance?”

Then there were excuses for late submission of peer reviews: “The in-house editors are strong and waterproof (not something you can claim of computers!)”

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 6 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Related articles


Print headline: ‘Less than an hour’ for peer review admin

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Chair (W3) of Architectural Construction and Design

Technische Universitat Dresden (tu Dresden)

Chair (W3) of Structural Design in Architecture

Technische Universitat Dresden (tu Dresden)

Chair (W2) of Architectural Conservation and Design

Technische Universitat Dresden (tu Dresden)
See all jobs

Most Commented

Doctoral study can seem like a 24-7 endeavour, but don't ignore these other opportunities, advise Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O'Gorman

Laurel and Hardy sawing a plank of wood

Working with other academics can be tricky so follow some key rules, say Kevin O'Gorman and Robert MacIntosh

Matthew Brazier illustration (9 February 2017)

How do you defeat Nazis and liars? Focus on the people in earshot, says eminent Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt

Improvement, performance, rankings, success

Phil Baty sets out why the World University Rankings are here to stay – and why that's a good thing

Warwick vice-chancellor Stuart Croft on why his university reluctantly joined the ‘flawed’ teaching excellence framework