Search

In this interview by email, Ann Scott, Editor‐in‐Chief of the British Journal of Psychotherapy from 2009 to 2022, is in conversation with Brett Kahr, responding to questions put to her by him and the Journal's Editorial Board. The interview focuses on Scott's background and its influence on her work; her early role at Free Association Books and her role as Deputy Editor of the BJP. She identifies papers from the Journal, on her watch as Editor‐in‐Chief, that have resonated particularly powerfully for her, commenting that all convey a sense of urgency and immediacy. She is asked to comment on the relationship between clinical and research approaches; current debates about informed consent; the Journal's title; the impact of online as well as print publication; whether published topics have changed over time; and the Journal's international standing. She describes the editorial principles that have governed her approach to the editorship, drawing on work by Britton, Turquet, Rey and Gabbard. She comments on some challenges she has faced as an editor, and shares the highlights of her tenure. Lastly, she is asked whether the editorship has impacted on her clinical practice, whether she has any regrets, and how she would like to be remembered in relation to her editorial work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Table of Contents Title Page Editorial Board Aims and Scope [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: There are concerns in the academic publishing community that it is becoming more difficult to secure reviews for scientific manuscripts. This study examines trends in editorial and peer review processes in an ophthalmological journal over the last decade. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of editorial data from the journal Acta Ophthalmologica containing all manuscript submissions between 2010 and 2020. Results: The number of yearly submissions grew between 2010 and 2019 from 1014 to 1623, and in 2020, the number of submissions increased to 2449. In total, the number of submissions increased by 142% between 2010 and 2020. Similarly, the proportion of desk‐rejected manuscripts increased from 48% to 67% during the period 2010–2020. The number of invitations needed to obtain one review showed an increase from 1.9 to 2.6 between 2010 and 2019, but remained stable between 2019 and 2020. However, the number of reviewers per reviewed manuscript, reviewed manuscripts per reviewer and time from invitation to completed review assignment remained almost constant between 2010 and 2020. Researchers based in North American were disproportionally often invited to review (18%) compared to their share of published articles (7%), and they also declined review invitation more frequently compared to scholars in other parts of the world. Conclusions: The study revealed an increase in submitted manuscripts to an ophthalmological journal over the last decade, with a further increase during the COVID‐19 pandemic. The number of reviewer invitations needed to obtain one review grew during the study period but remained constant between 2019 and 2020, despite a vast increase in submitted manuscripts. Hence, the burden for unique reviewers did not increase. Instead, the proportion of desk‐rejected manuscripts grew, and the reviewer pool expanded, which allowed the annual average number of reviews by individual reviewers to remain stable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientists who plan to publish in British Journal of Pharmacology (BJP) must read this article before undertaking a study. This editorial provides guidance for the design of experiments. We have published previously two guidance documents on experimental design and analysis (Curtis et al., 2015; Curtis et al., 2018). This update clarifies and simplifies the requirements on design and analysis for BJP manuscripts. This editorial also details updated requirements following an audit and discussion on best practice by the BJP editorial board. Explanations for the requirements are provided in the previous articles. Here, we address new issues that have arisen in the course of handling manuscripts and emphasise three aspects of design that continue to present the greatest challenge to authors: randomisation, blinded analysis and balance of group sizes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this special interview series, we profile members of The FEBS Journal editorial board to highlight their research focus, perspectives on the journal and future directions in their field. Rudi Beyaert is Full Professor in Molecular Biology at the Department of Biomedical Molecular Biology, Faculty of Sciences, of the University of Ghent (Belgium). He also serves as Vice‐Science Director of the Center for Inflammation Research of the VIB in Ghent, where he is heading the Unit of Molecular Signal Transduction in Inflammation. He has served as an Editorial Board Member of The FEBS Journal since 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to identify editorial features that can distinguish predatory and legitimate open access journals in the discipline of language and linguistics. Fifty-six journals from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and an equal number of journals from Beall's updated list of potential predatory journals (PPJs) were selected for a close examination. Analyses showed that these two groups of journals differed markedly in a large number of editorial features: certain publication frequencies, contact address and contact information, mean number of articles published per year, specialized focus, mean peer review time, claimed adoption of peer review, submission mode, listing of editor(s)-in-chief, relevance of their expertise, mean number of editorial board members, availability of the guide for authors and aims/scope sections, an APC for open access, mean APC, claimed indexation by DOAJ, provision of ethical guidelines and publishing policies, and presence of DOIs. Nevertheless, they did not differ significantly with regard to mean years of editorial activity, mention of average peer review time, mention of acceptance rate, mean number of editorial board members, mean number of editors, listing of editorial boards, claimed indexation by Google Scholar/ERIC/Scopus/Web of Science, COPE membership, and availability of ISSNs. These findings point to distinguishing editorial features that language and linguistics scholars need to consider when they look for legitimate open access journals to disseminate their research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented which brings together articles by authors Graeme Tytler, Jay Dillon, Monica Wallace, as well as a tribute to former members of the Editorial Board and a reprint of William Thackeray's "The Last Sketch." Topics discussed include retirement of two editorial board member, second article, ‘An Appraisal of Catherine and Heathcliff's Love Relationship" by Tytler and Monica Wallace explores the Bronte's familial Irish relations in ‘"The descendants of my grandfather."

We aimed to assess whether there is an association between the proportion of female editors-in-chief and members of editorial boards in infectious disease (ID) and microbiology journals. Our cross-sectional observational study included ID or microbiology journals according to the 2019 Clarivate Journal Citation Reports. Journals' Q ranking, open-access status, and number and gender of editors-in-chief and editorial board members were collected from the journals' official websites. We conducted a binary gender assignment for each editor using names, pictures, and other online descriptors. Journals with over 100 editorial board members and those with over 25% of board members for whom we could not determine gender were excluded. Editorial teams with >50% women were considered women dominant. Univariate and multivariable analyses for female editor dominance were performed. Overall, 167 journals were included, with total 6057 editorial members, 1655 (27.3%) of whom were women. Of 214 editors-in-chief, 48 (22%) were women, and only 25% (40 of 162) of journals had female editor-in-chief dominance. Factors associated with female dominance in the editor-in-chief role in univariate analysis were higher quartile rank, higher impact factor, and open access. Open-access journals remined significant in multivariable analysis (odds ratio (OR) 2.521; 95% CI, 1.140–5.576, p = 0.022). Larger editorial boards were less likely to have female dominance. Female editor-in-chief dominance was significantly associated with women-dominant editorial boards. ID and microbiology journals have significantly few women as editors-in-chief and editorial board members. Understanding the reasons for this inequality is required as an important step to confront and resolve it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forum papers are thought-provoking opinion pieces or essays founded in fact, sometimes containing speculation, on a civil engineering topic of general interest and relevance to the readership of the journal. The views expressed in this Forum article do not necessarily reflect the views of ASCE or the Editorial Board of the journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]