In our case, the digital traces particularly point to the editors procedural choices. You will know soon. Read Editage Insights in your favorite RSS Reader. Additionally, actions were recorded for person-IDs not having a role assigned for the respective manuscript. 2022.6.13 Editor Decision Started Decision sent to author NZip for reviewers 2022.10.10 9All Reviewers Assigned109Manuscript under consideration [CDATA[> This underlines the strong position and great responsibility of the editor. They enable, support or constrain some behaviours, but they can also make certain activities more visible and thereby more relevant than others, they pick and choose (ibid., 1). How can we live a good life? Comparisons with novel digital infrastructures (and their implementations) for other publishers with different peer review models are necessary in order to more systematically judge or reflect on the influence of these infrastructural tools on innovation or stabilization in editorial work. Recht Manage. We found that there was a central vertex dividing the decision component in two parts: Editor Decision Complete is the demarcation between events before (review process) and after decision (decision communication). This matched with what we would have expected to happen: there are editorial decisions without peer review, which is also represented by the editorial management system. My paper was published in a journal in 2021 october. This to be acknowledged, Seaver (2017) described some tactics for the ethnography of algorithmic systems, of which we take up the tactic of scavenging in our work: using the pieces of information accessible to us while at the same time keeping in mind that we only see a part of the whole picture. Review Time in Peer Review: Quantitative Analysis and Modelling of Editorial Workflows, Perspektiven der Infrastrukturforschung: care-full, relational, ko-laborativ, Schlsselwerke der Science & Technology Studies, Ggraph: An Implementation of Grammar of Graphics for Graphs and Networks, From Manuscript Evaluation to Article Valuation: The Changing Technologies of Journal Peer Review, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, Peer Review Practices: A Content Analysis of External Reviews in Science Funding, Zwischen Reputation und Markt: Ziele, Verfahren und Instrumente von (Selbst)Evaluationen aueruniversitrer, ffentlicher Forschungseinrichtungen. Thank you for visiting nature.com. On the other hand, the editors decisions are stored in four different elements. When all the reviewer reports are received, the editors decide to either: If you are invited to revise and resubmit your manuscript, you should follow the instructions provided by the editor in their decision email. How does the infrastructure support, strengthen or restrain the editors agency for administrating the process? Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Humboldt-Universitt zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. If you're being encouraged to revise, it should be clear from the letter and reviews you receive what you need to do. We stopped disintegration at the iteration before the four different decision events Manuscript Rejected, Manuscript Revise and Re-Review, Manuscript Revise only and Manuscript Accepted fell apart from each other into different components. It can mean many things, if the status has been same since you resubmitted your manuscript then editor might still be waiting for all the reviewers to send the editors their review reports, in some cases when one reviewer is too much busy and needs more time to finalize his review report, editors waits for him to send his comments then they contact the author and make a decision on the basis . While these activities certainly would exist without editorial management systems, the latter makes them more visible and suspect to monitoring and optimization, because they can standardize editorial practices. The second possibility is the long decision path from Manuscript Consultation Started through external peer review to Editor Decision Complete. Icons made by various authors from www.flaticon.com, Experiential Live Edit: How to improve Biomed manuscripts. Given the administrative responsibilities of the editors, it is plausible that some of these events refer to quality or process control related activities such as setting up automated mailings without a call for action. This procedure is followed by most journals. This led us to iteratively disintegrate the network by deleting the passage points. Also, the database is, of course, more complex and stores lots of information from user accounts to e-mail communication, but our analyses refer exclusively to the manuscript life cycle.