1 Citation 174 Views 9 Downloads
Government policies attempting to slow the spread of COVID-19 have reduced
access to research laboratories and shifted many scholars to working from
home. These disruptions will likely influence submissions to scholarly
journals, and affect the time available for editors and reviewers to
participate in peer review. In this editorial we examine how journal
submissions, and editorial and peer review processes, have been influenced
by the pandemic at six journals published by the British Ecological
Society (BES). We find no evidence of a change in the geographic pattern
of submissions from across the globe. We also find no evidence that
submission of manuscripts by women has been more affected by pandemic
disruptions than have submissions by men – the proportion of papers
authored by women during the COVID period of 2020 has not changed relative
to the same period in 2019. Editors handled papers just as quickly, and
reviewers have agreed to review just as often, during the pandemic
compared to pre-pandemic. The one notable change in peer review during the
pandemic is that reviewers replied more quickly to emails inviting them to
review (albeit only 4% sooner), and those that agreed to review returned
their reviews more quickly (17% sooner), during the pandemic. We thus find
no evidence at these six ecology journals that submissions and peer review
processes have been negatively impacted by the pandemic. Also, contrary to
analyses in other disciplines, we do not find evidence that there have
been disproportionate impacts of the pandemic on female authors and
reviewers.
174 views reported since publication in 2020.