Editors' Update is your one-stop online resource to discover more about the latest developments in journal publishing, policies and initiatives that affect you as an editor, as well as other services and support available. Discover and participate in upcoming events and webinars and join in topical discussions with your peers.
23 Sep 2015 1 Comment
Reference and citation styling is a key component that needs to be correct before a paper’s publication, but it can be time-consuming and complex for authors. A new Mendeley Desktop feature – developed by Mendeley and Elsevier’s Guide for Authors team – aims to simplify the process and is now live for more than 1,600 […]
Reference and citation styling is a key component that needs to be correct before a paper’s publication, but it can be time-consuming and complex for authors.
A new Mendeley Desktop feature – developed by Mendeley and Elsevier’s Guide for Authors team – aims to simplify the process and is now live for more than 1,600 journals.
Each journal has its own format requirements, including citation and reference style; the Guide for Authors provides the precise details. Reference management systems contain standard templates with the correct citation style information for most journals.
Several of these systems provide text processor plugins that let you select the appropriate journal reference style template from your style list, and then automatically format the citations and references correctly. At this moment plugins are available for Microsoft Word and LibreOffice: Mendeley, EndNote, Zotero and Papers offer both, and RefWorks has a Word-only plugin.
These can be very useful, saving authors time reformatting, and making sure they are using the right style for the journal. It is also very easy to reformat citations and references for a different journal –authors can just download the additional template.
Now we have made that process even easier for Mendeley Desktop: to add a journal to their reference template library and make it available for selection in the plugin, all authors need to do is click on the newly-added ‘one click’ link in the journal’s Guide for Authors and Mendeley Desktop ensures the journal style is added to their style list.
See the European Journal of Radiology as an example or try it for yourself directly: use APA 6th in Mendeley. The links work with styles from the citationstyles.org project (see the repository of styles on GitHub).
Many journals now accept submissions with a ‘free’ reference style. While this can save authors time upfront, if their article is accepted, it still needs to be adjusted to match the journal. The new one click get style template, combined with using plugins, makes it very simple for authors to make sure they are using the right reference style for the journal at initial submission, making manuscripts more suitable earlier in the process.
The aim is to have the one click styling available for many more Elsevier journals, including non-English journals and those using a non-standard reference style. This work is progressing very well and by the end of 2015 it should be available for most of Elsevier’s journals.
Egbert van Wezenbeek, Director Publication Process Development.
Egbert is responsible for the design, development and implementation of improvements related to the publication process of journal articles. This ranges from submission to final publication. The goal is to improve the experience of our authors, editors and reviewers in their interaction with us and our systems. In addition, there is a focus on adapting and innovating processes to add more value to the publication process and to the final published articles. Egbert has been working with Elsevier for more than 20 years. Prior to his current role he worked in various positions in Publishing. He has a PhD in Theoretical Chemistry from the Free University Amsterdam.
Every year, researchers submit around 1.2 million manuscripts to 2,300 Elsevier journals; 1.3 million reviewers support the peer review process and 350,000 articles are published. The submission and publication process is a huge task for editors, authors and reviewers, and an editorial system that can manage it well for all users is vital to ensure […]
Every year, researchers submit around 1.2 million manuscripts to 2,300 Elsevier journals; 1.3 million reviewers support the peer review process and 350,000 articles are published. The submission and publication process is a huge task for editors, authors and reviewers, and an editorial system that can manage it well for all users is vital to ensure timely publication of high quality articles.
We have spent the last couple of years working on a new proprietary editorial system for Elsevier, called EVISE®. By October 2016, we aim to have all Elsevier journals running on EVISE, supporting an improved user experience, improved editorial speed and increased quality content.
But why change the current system, and how will this help editors?
Authors, reviewers and editors have been using the Elsevier Editorial System (EES) for the last 13 years to submit manuscripts and manage submissions. In the early days, EES was new and functional, meeting the needs of its users. But as time went on, our journal portfolio grew and more users were relying on the system. User needs were changing, but it was becoming more and more cost prohibitive and technically very challenging to re-engineer EES. The gap between our editorial system and those of our competitors was widening, and we needed to make sure our users were getting the best system possible.
We could see a great opportunity to design and build a system that could integrate seamlessly with Elsevier’s other researcher-facing platforms, including Scopus, ScienceDirect, Mendeley and Elsevier.com. This integration means we can provide a single sign-on for all users, significantly improving researcher efficiency and effectiveness.
With EVISE, we are moving towards a system that uses one single database of users. Each journal will obviously still have its own specific configuration, but all users have one account that will give access to all tasks. It is easy to switch between journals to perform tasks. Even though we will have one single database, we will respect the natural boundaries between journals, but where this is needed and agreed between journals, data can be shared across journals to arrive at a true journal cluster.
One of the big challenges for editors is finding the right reviewers. In EVISE it will be possible to look beyond the single journal. Journals can build clusters and define access to their lists between themselves, helping to create high quality pools of reviewers. By default, editors will see only details of reviewers connected to their own journal, but it will be possible to see how active reviewers are across the whole of EVISE. This will allow for better review task assignment; for example, if a potential reviewer is already performing six reviews across other journals (details not given), it may be wiser to invite a different reviewer.
Integration will save editors time, too: many editors have several different roles with various journals, on editorial boards and as authors and reviewers, making single sign-on even more valuable for them. When an editor logs in, they will see their whole profile: they will see their ‘my to do list’ as a menu item, showing all their outstanding activities as an editor. The traffic light system shows editors the status of different manuscripts, helping them prioritize easily.
It’s important to get the most out of all this new functionality, so our team of 20 EVISE trainers is introducing editors to the system. The same team has also developed an e-learning platform: a very intuitive online platform for reviewers and authors, and perfect for editors unable to join the individual training sessions. It’s also helpful for Elsevier’s publishing teams, which support editors using the system. Editors can register on EVISE for further details and support.
Working on EVISE is exciting, challenging and interesting; it’s been a long road, taking a couple of years to get off the ground properly, but now that we’re rolling out the program we can really see the impact it’s having. We released the beta version of EVISE almost two years ago to a small pocket of journals. Releasing such an early version was not without risk, but we wanted to hear from the users and we got some very interesting feedback. We worked with around 20 journals on a daily basis to channel their feedback into future releases and improve the product.
In April 2014 we released the gamma version (release 1.0) of EVISE, which was an improvement on our earlier release but the functionality was still quite limited; it’s almost like building a very basic car without the sat nav/GPS, sixth gear and fuel efficiency. Building a product like this takes time and you need to release something to make sure you’re on the right track. We worked very closely with editors on our advisory board, and really road tested the system.
During the past year we have added more functionality in four releases, culminating in this year’s version 1.5 in August, which supports a significant number of journals. We are now ramping up rollout, and we are in the process of deploying the majority of journals to EVISE. We have a deployment team, training team and a large journal production organization, all working in tandem with product management to on-board journals to EVISE. The user experience remains key and drives product development at all times; the support organization is set up to channel this feedback to the EVISE® Product Management team.
Adrian Tedford has been with Elsevier for 19 years, joining the company as a Desk Editor, but moving into quality and training roles before taking responsibility for the Elsevier Editorial System (EES) training function in 2004. After supporting roll-out of over 1,500 journals to EES, Adrian moved into a Customer Service management role in 2006, establishing a centralized global department handling all journal editorial and production queries for all researcher groups. Adrian has been actively involved with EVISE since 2012, initially in combination with Journal Production responsibilities in France, Spain and Netherlands. Adrian is now accountable for EVISE deployment, training and support functions but also EES, which will ultimately be replaced by EVISE.
In the last edition of Editors’ Update, we highlighted the impending launch of Heliyon – Elsevier’s new open access journal publishing sound research across all disciplines. Since then, the journal has officially opened its doors and is now accepting manuscript submissions. It has also launched its website, heliyon.com. Since that initial announcement, much has been […]
In the last edition of Editors’ Update, we highlighted the impending launch of Heliyon – Elsevier’s new open access journal publishing sound research across all disciplines. Since then, the journal has officially opened its doors and is now accepting manuscript submissions. It has also launched its website, heliyon.com.
Since that initial announcement, much has been achieved – here are some important milestones on the journey so far:
Heliyon– the facts
- Once an article is accepted, Heliyon aims to publish it online within 72 hours
- The article publishing charge is $1,250, plus VAT or local taxes where applicable
- Authors can choose between two Creative Commons licenses: CC-BY and CC-BY-NC-ND
- A new, simple interface for the submission system will be launched later this year
- Lessons learnt could potentially be rolled out to other journals
Heliyon.com serves as a destination for all things Heliyon. From author guidelines to our open access policies and a directory of Editorial Board members, it contains all the information authors will need when deciding whether to submit to the journal. The website is linked to the EVISE® submission system, (the successor to the current Elsevier Editorial System – EES) which will facilitate the peer-review process.
The journal’s broad scope means that it is important to ensure Editorial Board members are drawn from all disciplines. With Editorial Assistants Marion Thibaudeau and Chris Russell, Editor-in-Chief Dr. Claudia Lupp has worked on recruiting more than 500 experts who will oversee the review process for content relevant to their specialty – the journal currently has no plans to actively recruit reviewers.
Dr. Lupp and her team have also brought on board over a dozen Editorial Advisors, who will provide essential guidance to the journal in their respective areas of expertise and will assist in the journal’s development. To learn more about Heliyon’s editorial team visit the Editorial Page on our website.
Our developers are currently working on a new submission interface that will be launched later this year. This interface will minimize the time it takes for authors to submit their content, which we hope will remove one of the biggest pain points in the publication process. More information about this new interface will be made available over the coming months.
When we announced Heliyon, we made it clear our goal is to experiment and innovate in areas such as content display, peer-review processes, and author services. Lessons learnt through this testing will then be evaluated for potential roll out to other Elsevier journals. We also made it clear we want to work hand in hand with the research community on these developments. The good news is that many of you have already contacted us with your suggestions and these have proved invaluable.
If you have any ideas about how to improve the publication process, please email us at email@example.com.
As we receive the first submissions to the journal, we are now gearing up for our next major milestone – the publication of content, currently scheduled for later this year.
Mary Beth O’Leary is Marketing and Publicity Manager for Heliyon, based in London. Prior to moving to London, she lived in Boston where she joined Elsevier in August 2009. For over five years she worked for Cell Press in various roles across editorial, marketing, and public relations. Most recently she acted as Media Relations Manager for Cell Press’ 30 titles. A graduate of the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts, she studied literature and art history.
11 Mar 2015 10 Comments
At the beginning of this year, Elsevier announced plans for a new open access journal, which will publish technically sound papers across all disciplines. The journal was announced early in its development to ensure members of the research community had the opportunity to provide feedback. In the weeks that followed, we received a number of […]
At the beginning of this year, Elsevier announced plans for a new open access journal, which will publish technically sound papers across all disciplines. The journal was announced early in its development to ensure members of the research community had the opportunity to provide feedback. In the weeks that followed, we received a number of useful suggestions and finalized a number of important details - including the name. This new broad scope journal will be called Heliyon!
Here is what you need to know about Heliyon’s development.
The journal has innovation at its core, so it was important that the name be unique, memorable, and new to the publishing world. Taking Helios - the Greek god of the sun – as our inspiration, we came up with the name Heliyon, to symbolize the light the journal will shine on important research.
Throughout Heliyon’s development, we will actively solicit feedback from the research community so we can ensure it suits your needs. From a new submission system to review processes and reader interface, Heliyon will adapt and evolve in response to the suggestions we receive. This feedback will be captured through a variety of channels including the recently launched The Heliyon Blog, Facebook page, Twitter profile, and Google+ Page.
Heliyon is now actively recruiting its Editorial Advisory Board (EAB) and would like to hear from enthusiastic academics across all research communities. Over the coming months, Heliyon’s Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Claudia Lupp, will collaborate with the EAB to make key decisions about the journal’s editorial direction. If you would like to be considered for the EAB, please email firstname.lastname@example.org.
Authors who publish their research in Heliyon will have a choice of two Creative Commons licenses: CC-BY and CC-BY-NC-ND. Both licenses enable the public to immediately access the final published article and provide authors with the ability to choose the most suitable license for their needs. The article publishing charge (APC) for research published in Heliyon will be $1,250 plus VAT or local taxes, where applicable.
This is Elsevier’s first open access, broad scope journal and it will be a platform for experimentation and innovation in areas such as content display, peer review processes, and author services. Lessons learnt through this testing can be rolled out to other Elsevier journals and will lead to improvements and innovation across the company. Additionally, in some instances, authors whose papers are rejected by other Elsevier journals will have the option of transferring their article to Heliyon, speeding up the publication process.
In the coming months, the journal will launch a new website and begin accepting article submissions. We will provide regular updates as the journal continues to develop and grow. If you have any questions about Heliyon in the meantime, please email email@example.com.
Mary Beth O’Leary is Marketing and Publicity Manager for Heliyon, based in London. Prior to moving to London, she lived in Boston where she joined Elsevier in August 2009. For over five years she worked for Cell Press in various roles across editorial, marketing, and public relations. Most recently she acted as Media Relations Manager for Cell Press’ 30 titles. A graduate of the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts, she studied literature and art history.
The Elsevier Editorial System (EES) provides a number of powerful tools you can use to manage the peer-review process. Recently, we have introduced a range of enhancements, including: The Find Reviewers Tool – reviewer candidates located using the tool can now be transferred into EES My EES Hub – this functionality introduced exciting options for […]
The Elsevier Editorial System (EES) provides a number of powerful tools you can use to manage the peer-review process.
Recently, we have introduced a range of enhancements, including:
In this article, we want to highlight some additional EES features – some of which you may not be aware of if they aren’t switched on for your journal. These features have been designed to make life easier for you, your authors and your reviewers, and your Publisher or Journal Manager will be happy to provide more information.
EES can be set up to allow reviewers to upload a file to support their review of a manuscript, for example, an annotated PDF in which they have marked up suggestions. When uploaded, the file(s) will automatically be sanitized by EES to ensure the reviewer’s identity is removed from the file properties and any ’sticky note’ comments the reviewer has added. An attachment that is uploaded by a reviewer will only be available to the author with the editor’s approval and the editor can also choose to edit and upload a replacement version.
Similarly, editors can upload files to support their decision on a manuscript. These files will be made available to the author when they receive the decision notification. As well as providing additional files, such as an annotated PDF, you could use this functionality to upload a review that was delivered late.
We all know that reviewers are busy people and many appreciate receiving timely reminders for their reviewing tasks. It is possible in EES to set up automated reminders so that email reminders are automatically sent by the system when the following situations apply:
Automating this process helps to ensure reminders are sent according to a set schedule, and reduces the effort required by the editor.
When an author uploads their submission files in EES, the system can automatically re-order the files so that they appear in the order required by the journal. This saves time for the author and also means that editors and reviewers receive correctly ordered PDFs.
When a reviewer receives an invitation to review, they can accept or decline the invitation without the need to log into EES, which saves them time. Did you know that an additional link can be included in EES emails to reviewers, allowing them to access a PDF of the submission without the need to log in? Depending on the policy of your journal, the link can be added to the reviewer invitation or the letter of instruction they receive when they agree to complete a review. This means a reviewer can accept to review, download the PDF, and then begin their review without even logging into EES!
When you invite reviewers in EES, you can also choose to set up ‘alternate reviewers’ – they will automatically receive an invitation to review if one of the original reviewers declines or fails to respond within the time limit. Including alternate reviewers means that you can locate a list of suitable reviewers for a submission upfront and then let EES manage the invitation process for you. Another advantage is that the alternate reviewers will still be available to invite for another submission, if needed.
With the Find Reviewers Tool you can easily locate reviewer candidates and import them into EES at the click of a button, where you can add them as reviewers, alternate reviewers, or just keep them as potential reviewers should you want to invite them manually.
With the ‘suggest reviewer preferences’ option in EES, you can narrow your search for reviewers by configuring a number of options to exclude anyone:
You can also change the order in which the results appear by assigning each criterion a level of importance. You can find out more about this on our EES Support Hub.
For more information on any of these features and their suitability for your journal, please contact your Publisher or Journal Manager.
Following graduation from the University of Exeter, Ben Rowe joined Elsevier in 2002. He was initially a Journal Manager and held a number of different roles before being appointed Service Manager for Operations in 2013. Throughout his time with Elsevier, Ben has worked on EES, including providing support to internal and external users. Ben is based in Exeter, UK.
15 Sep 2014 11 Comments
Since its launch in 2002, the Elsevier Editorial System (EES) has been Elsevier’s preferred online submission and peer-review system and now caters for around 2,120 journals. As you may know, we are currently developing a new web-based publishing workspace to replace EES. This new system — EVISE — has been designed to make the publishing experience easier […]
Since its launch in 2002, the Elsevier Editorial System (EES) has been Elsevier’s preferred online submission and peer-review system and now caters for around 2,120 journals.
As you may know, we are currently developing a new web-based publishing workspace to replace EES. This new system — EVISE — has been designed to make the publishing experience easier and less time-consuming by providing improved intelligence, communication, connections, ease, clarity and personalization. We have been working closely with researchers and current users of EES throughout the development process and will continue to do so after the initial launch, with new features and functionality being included in each subsequent release. EVISE will introduce a range of new benefits for editors including:
While development work on EVISE continues, the EES product development team has introduced a range of new tools and services with the aim of improving your EES experience. Many of these will also feature in EVISE so let’s take a brief look at them.
Quite often, we see research submitted that is of sound science, but not suited to the scope of the selected journal. ATS allows editors of around 600 participating journals to decline (rather than reject) the paper and transfer it to another, more suitable journal. To do this they simply select the right decision term in EES and identify the appropriate receiving journal(s). Editors can easily check the status of a transfer by looking at the dedicated ATS flags or at the ATS section in the manuscript’s ‘History’ screen. For editors of receiving journals, it is now easier to identify transferred papers within a journal, and view related information, such as reviewer comments. Automated ATS was first delivered in June of 2013, with enhancements delivered in January and April this year. The most recent enhancements support an author-driven transfer; all the editor needs to do is decline the submission. We will continue to add journals to existing and new ATS clusters during the course of this year.
We regularly conduct an audit of EES tools and processes to determine where improvements can be made. The major recommendations from a 2012 audit prompted a security change: user profile consolidation. First delivered in the early part of 2013, profile consolidation enables users to create one profile in EES with one username (email address) and password. This means people with multiple roles (editor, reviewer, author) across multiple journals, can create one profile applicable to all those roles/journals. Equally importantly, users consolidating their profiles in EES are protected from people misusing their profile because only they, as the registered user, have total control over the personal information it contains. More information about the benefits of user profile consolidation can be found on this Profile Consolidation FAQ. Consolidated users also benefit from ‘my EES hub’, which enables them to see an overview of all pending reviewer and author activities across all relevant journals. Uptake of user profile consolidation has been very high with 1.3 million unique profiles now created across 3.5 million accounts in EES. Enhancements to this feature have been delivered at regular intervals based on feedback from users. More information can be found here.
Did you know?
- EES currently receives more than 1.4 million submissions annually from 14 million researchers (both corresponding and co-authors); 95 percent are satisfied with their experiences.
- There are 3.6 million reviewers active in EES each year, 90 percent of whom have expressed satisfaction with the system.
- There are 25,000 editors active annually in EES; however, with editor satisfaction currently at 82 percent, it is clear there are still opportunities for us to improve the service and we have been monitoring your feedback closely leading to many of the developments outlined in this article.
ORCID is an open, non-profit, community-based initiative. By registering with ORCID, users receive a unique digital identifier — also called an ORCID or Open Researcher and Contributor ID — to which they can link their published articles and other professional activities. Researchers then have a single record of all their research, which can be made public. This can reduce or eliminate confusion when the same person's name appears in different ways in various publications, when people have the same or similar names, or when people change their name, e.g. following marriage. Put simply, an ORCID provides a unique identity for researchers — an ‘author DOI’ — similar to that used for publications.
EES integration with ORCID began in late-summer 2013 and we have already seen almost 50,000 EES user accounts linked to ORCID profiles; in fact, 20 percent of all EES submissions are now associated with an ORCID.
Editors can now search for reviewers on EES using an ORCID, which will help to ensure the right person is contacted when names are similar. If a user has linked their ORCID to their EES profile, the ORCID will be displayed in an additional column in the profile as a clickable link that opens the user’s public record on the ORCID website. This will allow editors to see the full list of research linked to that user, which will help with identifying suitable reviewers.
The plagiarism tool CrossCheck has now been integrated into EES for a large number of journals. CrossCheck is configurable by article type in EES. Once an author has submitted a manuscript, EES will automatically upload the editor PDF to CrossCheck’s iThenticate website, where it will be checked against a huge database of publications. Editors can then view an automatically generated similarity report within EES. Over the past few months, several feature enhancements have been introduced based on your feedback and we will continue to roll out the tool with the aim of making it available to all journals by the end of 2014.
In April 2014, an automated version of the tool was introduced. EES will now automatically send the keywords and authors associated with a submission to the Find Reviewers tool. Once compiled, editors can then export their list of reviewer candidates from the tool to EES at the click of a button. EES will check for matches within the journal’s EES database and, if none are found, allow editors to quickly proxy register the candidates they wish to invite as reviewers.
All of these new and enhanced features were introduced based on your feedback. We encourage you to continue letting us know how we can improve our products and services via the normal channel (firstname.lastname@example.org). Or you can post your comment below. Your feedback is key in helping us continue to deliver the best submission and peer-review experience possible and also feeds development priorities for EVISE.
Following graduation from the University of Limerick, Adrian Tedford joined Elsevier in 1996. He was initially a Desk Editor before moving into an EES trainer role in 2001. Tedford took on management of the training team in 2004 before setting up the new Editorial Production Customer Support group in 2006. He was appointed General Manager of Services in the new Eddie organization in 2009; Eddie was set up to centralize management of all EES-related activities. In late 2012, Tedford moved into his current role as Director of Journal Editorial Services & Operations, adding journal production responsibilities in Spain, France and NL to his EES/EVISE brief. He continues to be based in Shannon, Ireland, but travels extensively.
We appreciate how challenging the role of an editor can be; the continuous flow of papers many journals receive can result in a queue of manuscripts awaiting review. First, there’s the plagiarism check against the rapidly expanding body of research available; then, for increasingly interdisciplinary fields where research often stems from international collaboration, questions such […]
We appreciate how challenging the role of an editor can be; the continuous flow of papers many journals receive can result in a queue of manuscripts awaiting review. First, there’s the plagiarism check against the rapidly expanding body of research available; then, for increasingly interdisciplinary fields where research often stems from international collaboration, questions such as “how incremental or significant is the research to my field?” and “who are the best reviewers?” are becoming harder to answer. The information that individual editors use to evaluate manuscripts across the thousands of academic journals can be as varied and complex as snowflakes. Oh, and what do you do with the experimental data that the author wanted to submit…?
How can we at Elsevier help? Well, we can bring together data from existing platforms such as EES, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Mendeley to create new features leveraging search, aggregation and advanced recommender technologies, supported by our powerful HPCC supercomputer. A prime example of this is the recent upgrade to the Find a Reviewer tool in EES, powered by Scopus.
In this edition of Editors' Update, you will also hear about the next generation of SciVal and the 'term' or journal maps you can use to inform your future journal strategy – both these initiatives also look to Scopus for their data. And we link to data contained in non-Elsevier databases, for example, we recently announced the integration of CrossCheck's plagiarism software into EES, ensuring articles are automatically uploaded to iThenticate at the submission stage. We know how important it is to you and your authors to make the evaluation process faster; the initiatives outlined here are all important steps towards our goal of creating substantial efficiencies in the editorial workflow. Our aim is simple – to provide you with a toolbox, so that you can select which tools work best for you.
These are not just aspirations – we are working hard to make them a reality. We are changing how we build products and features; we are consulting editors throughout the development process, being more iterative in how we build and, more importantly, checking at each stage that what we are building is of value to you. We’re also continuing to develop competencies in online and analytics skills and are enhancing them through ongoing collaborations such as the Big Data Institute with University College London (UCL), which oversees research projects between our product teams and leading researchers in UCL in the area of big data and analytics. And we can go further…
…but first, let's go back to your role as an editor for a moment…
We realize that what is important to you is your real passion; your role at your institute, university or hospital. However, having reviewed incoming manuscripts, there is work to be done on the paper you are about to publish, the two peer-review requests for other journals sitting on your desk, and the grant funding application that needs finishing. The good news is that we can also support you with some of these activities. We can help authors find the best home for their research with our intuitive – and recently upgraded – Journal Finder tool and we can help them understand the impact of their published work through Scopus citations, downloads on ScienceDirect and altmetrics pilots. We can also now showcase their impact on their community via Mendeley.
However, in this issue we are focused on editors and I am excited to share with you some of the innovative things that we are working on to not only help you determine the future of your journal, but to streamline the editorial process so you can choose to spend your time where it matters most.
10 Jul 2014 3 Comments
Improvements to the Find Reviewers tool in EES have simplified the process of searching for potential referees. Find out more…
Egbert van Wezenbeek | Director Publication Process Development, Elsevier
The Find Reviewers application in the Elsevier Editorial System (EES) was built to help you locate appropriate reviewers.
Since its launch in 2010, editor feedback has been positive but we know that you have been keen to see better integration of the tool with EES.
We are pleased to inform you that following a recent update to EES this is now the case, resulting in a new workflow, details of which are outlined below.
In addition to the improved workflow outlined above, visibility of the Find Reviewers tool on the 'Search for Reviewers' page has been improved by adding a logo and hyperlinking the entire phrase that follows.
More detailed information on how to use the Find Reviewers tool can be found on our support pages and your publisher can also help with any queries you might have.
Learn what a consolidated EES user profile can mean for ORCID profiles and managing EES accounts.
Masako Takeda | Publishing Services Manager, EES, Elsevier
Introduced in December 2012, user profile consolidation allows users to link their Elsevier Editorial System (EES) journal accounts so that they can use the same username and password for each account and more easily update their personal information. This also improves the security of personal data on EES as only the individual user is allowed to make changes. Since user profile consolidation was implemented in EES, over 1 million users have created a consolidated profile, representing nearly 3 million individual EES journal accounts.
There are also added benefits available to researchers who have undergone the consolidation process.
ORCID is a non-profit organization providing researchers with a unique digital identifier (also called an ORCID or Open Researcher and Contributor ID) that links their work, eliminates name ambiguity, and stays with them throughout their career. Elsevier supports this initiative and has integrated the ORCID ID within EES. A user with a consolidated profile can link their ORCID ID to their EES journal accounts. When submitting a paper to a journal via EES, not only the corresponding author but also the co-authors can link their ORCIDs to the submission. This helps editors select the right reviewer candidates and also means that if a submission is accepted and published, all authors’ ORCID publication lists will automatically be updated. To date, over 650,000 researchers have created ORCID IDs and the number is growing.
Providing users with a single username and password to access all of their journal accounts was an important step in making EES easier to access. In December 2013, we went one step further when we introduced My EES Hub. If you have consolidated your profile, you can now log into EES and view all pending actions across the journals linked to that profile. My EES Hub features a single landing page from which you can:
To access these services, just log into any journal linked to your profile and click the My EES Hub link that appears at the top of the page (see below).
More information on these benefits is available in our support article: What is My EES Hub?
For more information on ORCID integration and the benefits for all EES users, please see ORCID/EES integration offers new benefits to researchers.
A guide to EES User Profile Consolidation is available on our Support Hub.
4 Oct 2013 6 Comments
Discover how the integration of ORCID into Elsevier’s Editorial System (EES) can simplify your workflow.
Ben Rowe | Service Manager, Operations, Elsevier
The use of ORCID - Open Researcher and Contributor ID - is growing in the publishing community. Elsevier has now integrated ORCID functionality into EES with the aim of making it even easier for authors to link their ORCIDs to their publication history, while also providing benefits to reviewers and you as editors.
ORCID is a not-for-profit organization founded by academic institutions, professional bodies, funding agencies and publishers in 2010. Elsevier is among the founding sponsors and helped to fund the initiative through loans and donations of money and staff time. By registering with ORCID, users receive a unique digital identifier, also called ORCID, to which they can link their published articles and other professional activities. Authors then have a single record of all their research, which can be made public.
This can reduce or eliminate confusion when the same person's name appears in different ways in various publications, when people have the same or similar names, or when people change their name, e.g. following marriage.
Put simply, an ORCID provides a unique identity for researchers — an ‘author DOI’ — similar to that used for publications.
Users with a consolidated user profile can now add their ORCID to their personal information on EES. Linking an ORCID in one journal automatically links it to all of the journals in their consolidated profile.
Those corresponding authors with a consolidated profile that don’t already have an ORCID linked to their profile will be offered the chance to link their ORCID as part of the submission process.
Co-authors also have the opportunity to link their ORCID. When the corresponding author completes submission to the journal, an email is automatically sent to all co-authors. The email contains instructions for linking their ORCID to the submitted paper. This linking is done on a stand-alone page without co-authors being required to register for an EES account.
Full details on linking an ORCID on EES are available on our ORCID article on the Support Hub.
Yes, linking an ORCID is entirely optional. We do encourage usage but we will never make it mandatory.
You can now search for reviewers on EES using an ORCID, which will help to ensure the right person is contacted when names are similar. If a user has linked his ORCID to his EES profile, the ORCID will be displayed in an additional column in the profile as a clickable link that opens the user’s public record on the ORCID website. This will allow you to see the full list of research linked to that user, which will help with identifying suitable reviewers.
When a paper is accepted and published in one of our journals, the ORCID will be included as part of the submission metadata. This metadata is sent to CrossRef, which in turn forwards it to ORCID. The article is then added automatically to the user’s list of works in his public profile on the ORCID website.
When reviewers have linked their ORCID on EES, you as editors will be able to view the public record on ORCID and gauge their suitability for a particular review. This should help to ensure that reviewers are not invited to review submissions outside their area of expertise.
A recent article on Elsevier Connect provides information on the growth of ORCID.
A Support Hub article on ORCID is available that provides information on ORCID and EES, including a guide to how to link an ORCID.
This autumn will see the integration of CrossCheck with Elsevier’s Editorial System (EES). We look at what this will mean for manuscripts.
Elma Kleikamp | Team Leader EES Application Management, Elsevier
Update, November 2013 - Since this Short Communication was published, there has been a change to the planned timeline for integration. The technology is currently being piloted with a group of journals and the EES team aims to roll it out to all journals by the beginning of 2014.
An integration of the plagiarism detection software CrossCheck with our Elsevier Editorial System (EES) is due to go live next month.
CrossCheck uses iThenticate originality detection software to identify text similarities which may indicate plagiarism. It does this by comparing manuscripts with both a web repository and the CrossCheck database, which contains more than 50 million published articles.
Currently the software needs to be operated separately from EES, which means editors wanting to use it to check manuscript(s) must login to iThenticate and upload the papers before they can view the results.
The new CrossCheck-EES integration will benefit editors in several ways:
The integration is scheduled to go live in October 2013.
26 Jun 2013 10 Comments
Over the past year, journals enrolled in the Your Paper, Your Way pilot have been allowing their authors to do just that – submit their papers without strict formatting or referencing requirements. Your Paper, Your Way was the brainchild of Sir Kelvin Davies, PhD, DSc, Editor-in-Chief of Free Radical Biology & Medicine. He introduced the […]
Over the past year, journals enrolled in the Your Paper, Your Way pilot have been allowing their authors to do just that – submit their papers without strict formatting or referencing requirements. Your Paper, Your Way was the brainchild of Sir Kelvin Davies, PhD, DSc, Editor-in-Chief of Free Radical Biology & Medicine. He introduced the concept in mid-2011 and, in 2012, we extended the option to a further 41 journals across all disciplines. Their experiences have proved so encouraging that, as of this July, all Elsevier journals will have the opportunity to join this exciting project.
Anthony Newman, a Publisher for Elsevier’s Life Sciences journals, was present at the annual editors’ meeting of Free Radical Biology & Medicine, when Davies came up with his unusual suggestion. In an article on Elsevier Connect, Newman recalled: “We were sitting around the table talking about what’s good and what’s bad. We’ve had a lot of push-back from authors who say, ‘I know you have a high rejection rate, but I have to spend a lot of time just to submit a manuscript’. We talked about the fact that we are forcing them to put it into our format when the chance of it being accepted is just 20%. It was at that point that Kelvin suggested we try allowing contributors to submit their manuscripts without the formatting.”
ARVE Error: Mode:
is invalid or not supported. Note that you will need the Pro Addon for lazyload modes.
Davies highlighted the benefits of Your Paper, Your Way (YPYW) in both a video editorial (above) and a post on the Editors’ Update Short Communications board back in March 2012. He explained: “Although standard formats do make it just that little bit easier for editors and reviewers to see everything in the correct style, the reality is that the advantage is very small, and we should really be focusing on the quality of science and not the format. For authors the difference is very significant… an easier submission process not only saves time and effort but may also allow authors to achieve faster publication speeds.” That easier submission process could also help to alleviate one of authors’ key concerns - when Elsevier’s Research & Academic Relations team surveyed researchers about what they find most frustrating, nearly one in three chose ‘preparing manuscripts’.
Once the YPYW pilot was underway, we asked the editors involved to share their thoughts on the project - 33 responded. Their feedback proved very positive, with the majority of editors reporting no increase in workload (see Figure 2). In fact, 95.5% of editors agreed that the new Your Paper, Your Way author instructions were clear and easy to follow. Their comments included: “Great feature and very helpful for authors.” “Highly recommend to do this and to in fact extend this to all submissions.” “Much easier submission process - if you have 10 figures you can easily see them in the right order.”
Your Paper, Your Way – the statistics
- 80% of editors surveyed found that YPYW manuscripts require less or the same amount of time as standard submissions.
- 70% of editors surveyed found that YPYW manuscripts are either the same or easier to work with than standard submissions.
- 87.5% of authors surveyed believed that YPYW reduces the amount of time typically taken to format and submit their paper
- 85% of authors surveyed found YPYW easy or extremely easy, compared to 51% of authors who chose traditional submission
Editors participating in the pilot were asked a series of questions related to the YPYW process. Their answers are captured in the pie charts below:
Papers submitted via the Your Paper, Your Way route still need to include the following key elements:
Any important ethical requirements, e.g. the Conflict of Interest declaration, are also still mandatory. As long as the references have all the necessary information, the author need not format according to a specific style because Elsevier will take care of that after acceptance.
Reflecting on Free Radical Biology & Medicine’s experiences since they launched the pilot in July 2011, Davies said his journal had not received any complaints from reviewers, and many authors had sent letters of thanks and praise for the system.
From December 2012 to date, the 42 pilot journals have received around 51.5% of submissions via the Your Paper, Your Way route. We expect this figure to increase as more authors become aware of the service. Authors who chose the Your Paper, Your Way submission route commented: “We chose to spend time on content instead of the ‘correct format’." “It was simpler and faster than (the) traditional one. I think it is a good way to speed the process.” “…time consuming formatting work was not undertaken unnecessarily.” “I didn't have to waste time with formatting before being sure about the acceptance.” We also asked authors to let us know which submission option they intended to use in the future - 80% said they will either always use, or mostly use, YPYW when it is available.
The pilot data suggests that Your Paper, Your Way is an author-friendly initiative that simplifies researchers’ lives. However, it is also important to ensure that the resulting papers do not complicate the review process. To evaluate the impact on reviewers, 165 responses from the Reviewer Feedback Programme (RFP) were analysed: 77 of these responses related to a YPYW submission, the remaining 88 to a traditional submission. There were no significant differences in reviewer satisfaction based on any related criteria: "The review format and structure for review submission was helpful"; "I am very satisfied overall with my experience of reviewing"; "I could read the manuscript and figures clearly with no technical problems".
Based on the positive researcher feedback we have received, invitations are currently being sent to all journals to participate in Your Paper, Your Way. If you haven’t already heard from your Publisher, they will be in contact shortly to discuss this further.
DIRECTOR PUBLISHING SERVICES
Following graduation from University College Galway, Ireland, Catriona joined Elsevier as a Journal Manager in 1999. She later had the opportunity to support and train hundreds of editors during the introduction of the Elsevier Editorial System (EES). Since then, she has worked in various management roles in STM Journals’ Publishing and is now responsible for its author-centricity and publishing ethics programs.
Daniel Gill PROJECT MANAGER, JOURNAL DEVELOPMENT Daniel joined Elsevier in January, working on web-driven, content innovation projects alongside a small team based in Amsterdam, New York and Dayton, Ohio. Daniel has a publishing degree and has publishing project management experience mainly centered around science publishing within the educational, postgraduate and professional arenas. Prior to Elsevier, Daniel worked at John Wiley and Sons Ltd and Pearson Education UK.
Find out about the changes underway to make our publishing systems ORCID-compatible.
Edward O'Breen | Marketing & Brand Manager EES and Evise, Elsevier
October last year saw the launch of ORCID, the Open Researcher and Contributors ID repository. The scheme allows academics, researchers and contributors to register for a unique ID which can be used to reliably identify individuals in the same way that ISBNs and DOIs identify books and articles.
Elsevier has now taken the first steps to fully integrate ORCID into the editorial and publishing process. Over the coming months we will gradually roll out functionality in the Elsevier Editorial System (EES) and other systems with the aim of fully supporting ORCID by Q4 2013.
The rollout will be phased as follows:
As of June 11, 2013, researchers can link their ORCID to their consolidated EES user profile.
A corresponding author’s ORCID, if linked to the consolidated EES user profile, will be added to the article metadata. As a result, the published article will automatically appear in the corresponding author’s ORCID list of published works. This functionality will be launched in July 2013.
Co-authors’ ORCIDs, if provided during submission of the paper, will be added to the article metadata. The published article will then automatically be added to the ORCID list of published works for all authors who shared their ORCID with EES. This functionality will be available in Q3 of 2013.
Authorized users, e.g. editors and journal managers, will be able to find people in EES using the ORCID as a search term. This feature is of value to EES users who select and invite reviewers. Using the ORCID removes ambiguity when searching for people. This functionality will be available in Q4 of 2013.
12 Mar 2013 11 Comments
As journals’ reference-related instructions have continued to grow in complexity, so too has the amount of time required to comply with them. Recent research  shows that authors now spend an average 3.2 hours per paper on this task. Not only is this an unnecessary use of their time, the focus on formatting increases the opportunities […]
As journals’ reference-related instructions have continued to grow in complexity, so too has the amount of time required to comply with them.
Recent research  shows that authors now spend an average 3.2 hours per paper on this task. Not only is this an unnecessary use of their time, the focus on formatting increases the opportunities for factual errors to creep in.
Elsevier’s Publishing Services team has been working on a multi-stranded shake-up of the reference system. Dubbed the Reference Simplification Project, it will not only standardize reference styles, but offer journals the opportunity to forego them completely. Other elements will focus on the accuracy of link information.
Elizabeth Przybysz, a Junior Project Manager in Publishing Services, has been leading the project team. She believes one of the key benefits will be an increase in author satisfaction as more of their time is freed up to concentrate on other elements of the paper. “We think we will also see journal discoverability enhanced, while publication times should experience a reduction,” she added.
Over the coming year, a number of changes will be rolled out – one of these will automatically be applied to all Elsevier titles while others will be introduced on an opt-in basis. Read on to find out what it could mean for your journal.
Examples of some of the detailed formatting specifications we currently require from authors:
- Journal titles should be abbreviated without punctuation and not in italics
- Always use "&" symbol when there are two authors in parentheses
- ONLY use the English version "et al"
The majority of Elsevier journals require authors to use one of 10 standard reference styles. Another 200 plus journals use their own unique, non-standard reference styles. Last summer, Elsevier’s User Centered Design team carried out a survey and usability tests with journal readers. Those questioned indicated that six styles in particular were easy to follow. Based on this information, six standard Elsevier styles will be rolled out to all Elsevier-owned journals in 2013. These are:
Appreciated by our readers for displaying all author names. Once all deviations are removed, this style will be used by 335 Elsevier-owned titles. The style is popular in Physical Sciences.
Primarily used in Humanities and Social Sciences. Our readers liked the name / date format, which displays basic information without the need to visit the last article page. It will be used by more than 400 journals.
The Vancouver Embellished format will be incorporated into this style and the result will be used by more than 242 journals - popular in Medical Sciences.
Vancouver Name / Date
A version for communities that prefer citations to feature the authors’ names in parentheses.
American Psychological Association
The only style presenting full journal titles, an option preferred by 35% of the readers we spoke to. Almost 200 of our journals will follow this style, especially within Social and Economic Sciences.
American Medical Association
This style is used in more than 150 medical journals, especially popular amongst Societies.
A standard style for each journal will be chosen based on its close resemblance to the journal’s current reference style. If you feel that another style from our list above suits the journal better, please contact your Publisher.
All styles will include the article and chapter title. In the past, these items were removed due to space restrictions in print versions of journals, however, our survey respondents asked for their reintroduction to assist with assessing source relevance.
This will be offered an on opt-in basis only. If you choose this model for your journal, authors will be invited to submit their references in any style, as long as the references are complete and consistent. The typesetters will apply the final style.
Elizabeth believes this may prove a deciding factor for authors when choosing a journal and could help to attract more high-quality papers. She adds: “In exchange, we will ask authors to focus on the quality of the data critical for the link creation, invite them to use the DOI and urge them to pay attention to the presence of links in any references they decide to copy from other sources.
“Online what really matters is that a citation is linked to its source. Impact Factors take into account the number of citations an article has received. An error introduced to a reference can prevent a link creation and potentially lead to a journal missing out on a few decimal points on its Impact Factor.”
Key data used by the linking services to create a link are author(s) name(s), journal title (or its standard abbreviation), year of publication and the pagination. Italics, use of dots and data sequence are not important. Elizabeth explained: “That key data must be recognized correctly in the process of tagging; therefore the consistency of the pattern of the reference is essential for the structuring. DOIs are real life savers: even if all other data is misspelled, but the DOI is correct, the link will be still created.”
Those journals adopting this model will be closely monitored to ensure that the typesetters effectively convert the styles and that the change brings the benefits expected.
Examples of the journal-specific reference style will still be displayed in the Guide for Authors. As part of the project we will also update the Endnote and Reference Managers, so that they accurately reflect the journal style.
Journals adopting this option would see the following section appear in their Guide for Authors
Guide for Authors: new instructions
Discoverability of research and high quality peer review are ensured by online links to the sources cited. In order to allow us to create links within ScienceDirect and to abstracting and indexing services, such as Scopus, CrossRef or PubMed, please ensure that data provided in the references are correct. Please note that incorrect surnames, journal/book titles, publication year and pagination may prevent the link creation. When copying references, please be careful as they may already contain an error. Use of the DOI is encouraged.
There are no strict requirements on reference formatting at submission. References can be in any style or format as long as the style is consistent. Author(s) name(s), journal title/book title, chapter title/article title, year of publication, volume and issue/book chapter and the pagination must be present. Use of DOI is highly encouraged. The reference style used by the journal will be applied to the accepted article by Elsevier at the proof stage. Note that incorrect or missing data will be highlighted at proof stage for the author to correct.
The reference style used by this journal is 'here we state the journal-specific style'. If you do wish to format the references yourself they should be arranged according to the following examples...
Elsevier plans to introduce a new step of comparing the references received from an author with the database of one of the major linking service providers. This will allow us to correct and complete missing data without the need to delay publication by sending the manuscript back to the author. We hope to see this come into effect next year (2014).
If you wish to find out more about the Reference Simplification Project and what it means for your journal, please contact your Publisher. The project complements other author-centric solutions currently under development at Elsevier. The Simpler Submission service, for example, offers authors the opportunity to reduce formatting across all manuscript components.
Understanding reader behavior
The survey and usability tests carried out by our User Centered Design department have uncovered the following facts about reader behavior:
- While 53% of researchers read articles as downloaded files on their screens, 45% prefer to print them out before reading. With new technologies such as tablets, we expect the percentage opting for print to decrease.
- 48% indicate that while they may look through the references while reading an article, they only go to the sources once they have finished reading.
- Linking of references online was important to 88% of the respondents.
- 58% prefer the name / date citation format over numbered citation.
- 46% indicate they want to see the names of all authors in the citation, no matter how long the list is.
- 69% of authors format references manually. Reference formatting takes, on average, three hours per paper, even taking into consideration the use of reference managers.
- 39% do not include DOIs, and 16% don’t know what a DOI is.
- The researchers surveyed believe that within a reference, items should be listed in the following order of importance:
- Article title
- Title of publication it appeared in
- Year of publication
JUNIOR PROJECT MANAGER
Elizabeth joined Publishing Services for STM Journals in October 2011. Alongside the References Simplification project she manages the Simpler Submission project mentioned in the article. Elizabeth has also successfully introduced the Guide of Transfer and Acquisitions for Publishers. Prior to her move to Publishing Services, Elizabeth worked in Customer Services, assisting our customers in both Italian and Polish. Before moving to Oxford, Elizabeth worked in the banking sector in Italy and Ireland.
 Elsevier’s User Centered Design team surveyed around 200 authors in August 2012. Respondents were asked how long it took them to prepare references and if they used any software to reduce the workload. Although 60% of respondents used software, the average time taken to format references was found to be 3.2 hours.
Since the launch of the EES user consolidation project in December last year, thousands of researchers have responded. Find out more…
Edward O'Breen | Marketing and Brand Manager, Elsevier
In a recent post on the Short Communications Board, our Vice President of Corporate Relations, Tom Reller, discussed the hacking of EES, our online platform for managing the submission and peer-review process.
He explained that in late October last year, one of the editors of Optics & Laser Technology (JOLT) alerted our EES team that reviewers for two of his assigned submissions had been invited but not by him. Our team immediately launched an investigation and discovered that someone had been able to retrieve the EES username and password information for this editor.
Tom went on to outline the various steps we are taking to reduce these risks, and that one of these innovations - user profile consolidation – had become available to all EES users on December 3, 2012.
Consolidation of user profiles was a project the EES team was working on prior to the hacking. A regular audit of EES had identified the many advantages that enabling researchers to use a single username and password across all EES journal sites would provide. Not only would it streamline their workflow, it would increase security levels too.
Since December 3, about 350,000 users have consolidated more than 950,000 individual EES accounts into about 350,000 consolidated user profiles.
Alongside the user profile consolidation, we have also introduced enhancements in security and user data protection. EES users can now reset their passwords via a self-chosen security question. They will receive a confirmation by email and only the user will have access to the password and security question. This makes the end user responsible for his/her own data and helps to avoid abuse of EES accounts.
On December 19 last year, we surveyed those EES users who had consolidated their accounts since the December 3 launch. More than 400 researchers provided their feedback, which revealed:
For a few days following the December 3 launch, EES servers were slow to respond due to the large number of users consolidating their profiles. We appreciated this was very frustrating for users and worked on improving the situation. Luckily, only very few users still experience this problem and we have seen calls to our Elsevier Customer Services team fall from 1.6% to 0.2%.
4 Jun 2012 10 Comments
As many of you know, Elsevier is currently building Evise, our next generation online submission and peer-review system. The rollout of Evise is planned to begin in the second half of 2013 and to prepare for a smooth transition, 2012 will see the introduction of new features to our current system, EES. These include something […]
As many of you know, Elsevier is currently building Evise, our next generation online submission and peer-review system. The rollout of Evise is planned to begin in the second half of 2013 and to prepare for a smooth transition, 2012 will see the introduction of new features to our current system, EES.
These include something we know you have been keen to see – a single username and password across all EES journal sites.
Researchers have multiple roles in publishing: many authors are also reviewers; many Editors are also authors and reviewers. And researchers can perform these roles for multiple journals. We know that EES does not recognize that sufficiently so, later this year, we will begin the task of consolidating all user accounts.
Once the change has been rolled out, when you log into EES you will receive a prompt to consolidate your accounts. EES looks for matching associated email addresses when deciding which accounts to group together. If you have used different email addresses per EES site, you can indicate this during consolidation. Once you have selected the accounts to consolidate, you will receive a confirmation email. This is sent to ensure that only the account owner can give approval.
During consolidation, you will also be asked to choose a security question and answer. You will need these to reset your password if you forget it.
You will have 30 days to consolidate your accounts. After this period, you will only be able to use EES if you have consolidated your accounts.
After you have followed the consolidation procedure, you will be able to use the same username and password to access each EES journal site you use. Your primary email address in EES will be your username. You will continue to log into each EES journal site separately.
If you have multiple roles for a single journal, you will need to log off and log in again if you want to switch your user role.
The new user consolidation functionality will be piloted in July and August 2012, with roll out activity ramping up from September 2012 onwards. We will keep you informed of our progress by email.
We are also working on consolidating the online support available for EES. This is currently spread across the Elsevier website but going forward generic information on EES will be available on Elsevier.com, while EES support information will be presented in EES. That means that if you click on Help in EES, a pop-up window will open up in which you will be able to quickly access the right support content. The content will be presented per role and per phase in the editorial process to make it easier for you. The search function will also be available in the window.
Elsevier has a number of user feedback programs and the results of these, along with the questions end users ask Elsevier customer support, are just some of the sources we call on when determining which improvements we should introduce. You can also provide feedback via email@example.com.
MARKETING AND BRAND MANAGER, EES AND EVISE
Edward has worked on the development and launch of new products and services since 1997. Prior to joining Elsevier in 2011, he worked for telecom operators, utilities and publishers. He has a MSc degree in Business Administration from the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam.