Journals vary dramatically in how quick they are to make a first decision, and in how quickly they get accepted articles online and/or in print. E.g. some journals make uncorrected proofs available online within a few days, some have final versions within a few weeks, others can take a few months or more for the article to be available at all.
However, it's often hard to find much information on this, and harder still to find it in a form that allows efficient comparison of a group of journals (cf. the infamous JCR Impact Factor or Google Scholar's journal metrics). Anna Sharman's blog is one of the best sources I've found so far, but is (understandably) far from complete (links below, now updated following the blog's move to cofactorscience.com).
Could this be something that ResearchGate should try to do? E.g. either by asking journals/publishers for information, or by asking authors to "tag" their papers with times for first review and from acceptance to appearance, so that RG can then make journal-level statistics available? This might be unique, and could be far more useful than RG's current project on citations, which seems like it is never going to compete with Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, etc.
http://cofactorscience.com/blog/submission-to-first-decision-time
http://cofactorscience.com/blog/acceptance-to-publication-time
http://cofactorscience.com/blog/surveys-of-journal-speeds-and-decisions
It is a great question to kick around, may I offer some off the cuff ideas?
Every paper published by a reputable publisher has the received, revised, accepted, first online and issue pub date so the data are all there for anyone to use. The problem I foresee is getting the data into a manageable format so that it can provide wholesome results.
The reported measures would have to be robust. Simple averages may not be appropriate, often times different article types have different peer review proceedures so these data will be skewed by journal composition. Secondly the volume of the pool of experts is likely to vary from field to field therefore availability will have an impact on the speed. Finally, fast decisions and quick publication times may not equal good reviewing and great production.
I would advise all authors to survey the dates published in articles within their target journals to evaluate its appropriateness in terms of speed.
Great comments Paul, though there is one bit of data that isn't typically there, which is time to first decision; the time between the received and revised dates includes the time it takes the authors to make their revisions, which probably shouldn't be a factor in evaluating the journal's speed.
I agree with your caveats, but am often faced with a decision between journals with similar reputations (impact factors, etc.) and probably similar pools of reviewers, but that might differ substantially in their editorial/publishing speed. You're right that it's possible to get a rough idea by looking at a few recently published articles in each journal and comparing the times, but this could certainly be made easier and more robust with properly collected and processed data.
I totally agree Gerard, an official speed metric (if done right) might make publishers more answerable to the speed issue and hopefully nuture some transparent competition on that front. This would be good news for authors.
Exciting question, indeed. I expect differences in results for closed journals (fees paid by libraries) and 'good' OA journals (no fees or fees paid by authors). 'Good' means the same rigorous peer review as closed journals here. A valid speed metric and results gained through its application could justify/falsify the hypothesis.
Looks like Journal Guide are collecting data on time to first decision and total time to publication as part of the journal ratings that registered users can submit, but this data is not yet made available, as the site is in beta at present.
See also Journalysis and Cofactor's Journal Selector (forth-coming).
www.journalguide.com
http://www.journalysis.org/
http://cofactorscience.com/journal-selector
Here is another very useful resource, although unfortunately without access to information on time to first decision.
http://blog.dhimmel.com/plos-and-publishing-delays/
Dear Gerard R Ridgway,
Recently, I did a little research on Computer Science (including Computer Vision, Pattern Recognition or Image Processing) Journals List, Review Speed, Impact Factors, and Open Access Fee from Elsevier, Springer, and Hindawi. Please find them at the attached links.
Hope this would add to your crowdsource help. I really support your idea to have a crowdsource platform to evaluate those Journals.
Cheers.
https://www.academia.edu/16582895/Elsevier_Computer_Science_Journals_List_Review_Speed_Impact_Factors_and_Open_Access_Fee
https://www.academia.edu/16583166/Springer_Computer_Science_Journals_List_Review_Speed_Impact_Factors_and_Open_Access_Fee
https://www.academia.edu/16583258/Hindawi_Computer_Science_Journals_List_Review_Speed_Impact_Factors_and_Open_Access_Fee
You can try Elsevier Journal finder, if you are interested in elsevier journals
https://www.elsevier.com/physical-sciences-and-engineering/environmental-science/journals/fast-publication-in-environmental-science
JoVE now has a streamlined process and is able to publish your paper in approximately 2 months. Go to JoVE.com/publish to contact an editor
Dear Gerard,
if you still looking for a database that collects the speed and other turnaround time of journals, i recommend https://www.letpub.com/
Gerard R Ridgway
Thank you, I agree that this would be an extremely useful feature of RG if it were developed and adopted. Great idea.
Almost a decade on. Runde (2021) penned an interesting paper on time to publish.
Interestingly, I'm faced with a manuscript ticking over #700days 'time to first decision'
Runde, B. J. (2021). Time to publish? Turnaround times, acceptance rates, and impact factors of journals in fisheries science. PLoS ONE, 16(9), e0257841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257841
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics
- Statistics
- Applied Statistics
- Survey Design
- Questionnaire