In peer review,
Does the innovative of idea in article is besed on methodolgy , or study area, or the used dataset or all of them?
How editors and reviewers evaluate the innovative idea of article ?
Thanks in advance
(1) Number of articles available in one specific field of research. Few papers in a field may hint an innovative idea.
(2) If the reference section cites old articles, the innovative idea may not be there.
(3) If the article repeats well established phenomenon presented in text books, innovative idea is missing.
(4) A generalized conclusion section which is well known to the particular community of researchers.
Do you mean how do editors decide their recommendation and how the editors decide about acceptance?
B.G. Mousa, the contribution of each author is generally stated by the authors themselves, what matters to the editors, in the end, is that all authors meet the criteria for authorship based on what authors state. If there is a conflict between the authors about the contribution of some of them, then they have to decide that before they go ahead with the submission.
Sanaa N Al- Haj Ali thank you dear dr, maybe my question not written well and you miss understand what i mean, as you know paper consider for publication based on cotribution of author by doing innovative work. therefore i ask how editor and reviewers evaluate work (which criteria) does it based on proposed new methodolgy , or applying methodolgy on other study area, or used dataset or all of them? or.......
Daniel Wright than you dear dr, yes i need to know more how they evaluate work (which criteria) does it based on proposed new methodolgy , or applying methodolgy on other study area, or used dataset or all of them? or.......
(1) Number of articles available in one specific field of research. Few papers in a field may hint an innovative idea.
(2) If the reference section cites old articles, the innovative idea may not be there.
(3) If the article repeats well established phenomenon presented in text books, innovative idea is missing.
(4) A generalized conclusion section which is well known to the particular community of researchers.
There is no single answer to this question but it is absolutely a must to focus though. The thing is the ideal situation is to have a combination of the mentioned innovations on the paper as you already have mentioned: new method+new data set+new study area and etc. Usually, the reviewers have an evaluation sheet that contains multiple criteria to conclude if the manuscript scores high or low to be able to publish. However, we all know that sometimes it is quite difficult to argue about the novelty of the paper. The reviewers and editors might get convinced if you argue and sort of prove that the paper is worth being published. Let's say you gonna focus only on one innovation which is new data set. Then, argue about it with the full arsenal of arguments you have. It means describing, emphasizing its pros, comparing, and showing its supremacy to the other works. Publishing is all about arguments. Arguing about innovation is not an exception. Good luck!
Best
Ibrahim
Dear B.G. Mousa editors of renowned scientific journals select their reviewers on the basis of their areas of expertise. When you register with the online submission system of a journal and an author or reviewer, you are normally asked what your area of expertise are. As a reviewer you must have a good overview of your field and be informed about the latest developments. Only then can you judge if a manuscript is innovative, novel, and exciting or if it's just routine work. For more information about peer-review please see this useful link entitled "What is Peer Review in Science? A Complete Guide"
https://artifacts.ai/what-is-a-peer-review-in-science/
Frank T. Edelmann Ibrahim Niftiyev Isaac Dinaharan Thank you dear dr, for valuable and informative comments.
As I know, the innovative idea or new contributions could be one of the next list:-
1- explanation
2- method
3- data sets
4- area
But the most important thing how to cover the gab through the overview ?
Also, you can find many webinars and tutorials presented by Elsevier to help you if you want to be a reviewer.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals