Editor Desk
Welcome to your Editor Desk! Below you'll find the latest updates about Editorial Manager (EM), news from Elsevier and the wider publishing industry, and a selection of best practice, training and e-learning for editors. We will regularly add new content and alert you via announcements in EM. We hope you find this resource useful!
Editorial Manager updates
Find Reviewers makes it easier to identify previous reviewers (January 2024)
The Find Reviewers tool enables editors to identify reviewers of the original manuscript and the revision(s) more easily with an enhanced signal.
The signal now includes the revision number, which makes it clearer when reviewers were invited, and if they should be invited for subsequent rounds. These data are also made available in the “Manuscript Details” section to make it easier to add previous reviewers directly without having to re-find them.
"Forbidden as reviewer" status for some reviewers with an invalid email address (October 2023)
We have assigned a "Forbidden as reviewer" status to some reviewers that have an invalid Editorial Manager (EM) email address.
For a number of reviewers that have an EM email address that bounces, we have assigned the status "Forbidden as reviewer", and added this information to the People Notes. This is to alert editors that these reviewers cannot be reached at the given email address, and they should search for an alternative email address where possible.
Note that we have reverted a large batch of "Forbidden as reviewer" statuses late September, after we learned that in fact these addresses were correct, so what is left is just a selection of reviewers that really cannot be reached at the email address that they provided.
For any questions, please reach out to your Journal Manager.
“Session Preferences” added to Find Reviewers (November 2022)
Find Reviewers continues to launch new enhancements, the most recent one being the addition of the “Session Preferences” section.
By setting your “Session Preferences” you can optimize your search settings for each individual manuscript. You will find this new option on the left-hand side menu.
“Matching Works” will allow you manually change the author keywords that are used to match reviewers with the manuscript if you want to search on more relevant keywords.The
The “Conflict of Interest” author list highlights candidates that are checked for a conflict of interest with one or more of the selected authors for Keyword Search, Author Search, Interested Reviewers, Journal Reviewers and Editorial Board Members, which you can decide to in- or exclude in your search.
You can now also manually add candidates to the Conflict of Interest check, by clicking on “Add to Conflict of Interest” on the main Find Reviewers screen.
Session Preferences
Check out our new video guide about Scope Match (November 2022)
We are pleased to announce our support video about using Scope Match in Editorial Manageropens in new tab/window. With Scope Match, you will be able to gain topical insight on the publication of similar papers, see where the discussion is happening, and stay up to date about what is being published in the field to minimize blind spots.
Scope Match consists of two sections:
Showcasing the five most related articles published in your journal and other journals – helping you to determine whether the manuscript best suits your, or perhaps another journal
Showcasing additional information about your journal’s ecosystem journals – providing you with information about other relevant journals should you wish to reject the manuscript and suggest a transfer
Scope Match can be accessed by clicking on the new "Manuscript Analysis Services" action link in EM, and from there clicking on the "Go to report" link in the "Evaluate Manuscript" line.
News
Check out our diversity, ethics and inclusion roundup on Elsevier.com
Diversity, ethics & inclusion (DEI) in research are critical for enabling all individuals to advance and excel; for rigor and quality in science; and for ensuring more equitable and impactful research outcomes for society. Editors, societies and publishers play crucial roles in advancing DEI in journals, research and society.
Our DEI page for editors outlines:
Elsevier’s collaborative and evidence-based approach to advancing DEI throughout the research and publishing process
How we are innovating our processes and tools in support of DEI
Best practice you should adopt as an editor
If you have not already done so, please view our Editor Essentials module on inclusion and diversityopens in new tab/window to learn about the practical steps you can take to promote DEI across your journal’s Editorial Board, reviewers and authors.
With the insights gained and ideas sparked by these resources, please reach out to your editorial colleagues and publishing contact to discuss how to progress DEI on your journal.
Why we’re asking users to self-report diversity data in EM
We have now begun inviting editors, reviewers, and authors to – optionally – self-report their gender identity, race and ethnicity (GRE) across journals in Editorial Manager (EM). This question is live across many Elsevier proprietary journals already; chances are, you have encountered these questions.
Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in research are critical for enabling all individuals to advance and excel; for rigor and quality in science; and for ensuring more equitable and impactful research outcomes for society. Societal challenges of our time, related to science and health, necessitate harnessing the inclusive contribution of diverse researchers. At Elsevier we take an evidence-based approach to advancing EDI. Drawing on users’ self-reported diversity data, we are able to put in place actions, set goals, and measure progress to improve diversity across journal editorial processes and drive greater equity in publishing and research, for the benefit of society. The schemas were developed and endorsed in April this yearopens in new tab/window by the Joint Commitment on Diversity data collection in scholarly publishing (rsc.org)opens in new tab/window. This Joint commitment for action on inclusion and diversity in publishing (rsc.org)opens in new tab/window group comprises 53 industry organizations. The development also drew on insights from subject matter experts, including Professor Ann Morning and Elsevier’s Inclusion & Diversity Advisory Board, and from a large (>1,000 respondent), global and publisher-agnostic survey which we used to further refine the schemas.
Elsevier aimed to develop a set of questions and options that resonate with researchers we serve from around the globe to engender a willingness to self-report. We concede that the schemas may not be perfect, and we will periodically review, and revise them if necessary, in line with feedback and any new research-based best practices related to diversity questionnaires.
Important: While users are required to provide a response, they can select the “I prefer not to disclose” option for any of the three questions if they are uncomfortable answering for whatever reason.
Learn more by watching our: editor webinar: Self-reporting diversity data in Editorial Manageropens in new tab/window.
What should you do when encountering suspected image duplication or manipulation?
A new decision tree for allegations of image duplication or manipulation, together with a new form letter for contacting authors regarding image integrity issues is now live on the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit.
Image alteration/duplication can be an extremely serious issue, more so than text plagiarism because images are often a direct representation of research data. While alteration of images may be well-intentioned or even accidental, some image issues can signify data falsification or fabrication, or even be indicative of the output of so-called paper mills.
Last year, the STM Associationopens in new tab/window, which works with its members to develop publishing industry standards to advance trusted research worldwide, established a Working Group on Image Alterations and Duplicationsopens in new tab/window to develop a three-tier classification system for types and severity of image-related issues, provide guidance on what types of image alteration are permissible under what conditions, and outline actions editors may take to protect or correct the scholarly record. This group brought together experts from nine scholarly publishing organizations that believe editors, as well as researchers, science and society, can hugely benefit from recommendations being aligned across journals. Our new decision tree draws on the best practice recommendations from this group, and is also aligned with COPE guidelinesopens in new tab/window.
Have you received an email from [email protected]?
Last month we enabled a duplicate submission check between journals for most proprietary journals on Editorial Manager (EM). You may receive alerts from [email protected] if a potential duplicate submissions between journals is detected.
Duplicate publications overweigh the relative importance of published findings and distort the academic record of the authors involved; they can also be a hallmark of potential so-called paper mill submissions. Additionally, evaluating a submission that is simultaneously under consideration with another journal(s) represents a misuse of your, and reviewers’, valuable and limited time. When potential duplicates are detected, you and the handling editor(s) at the other journal(s) will be notified outside EM via email from [email protected]. You should then consult the other editor(s) copied in the email to share and compare the manuscript PDFs.
You should use your expert judgement, and follow our Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) guidelines, to verify whether or not there is indeed duplication and take any necessary action. While the check has been optimized, false negatives are possible, so these notifications should not replace your usual best practice and due diligence in detecting potential duplicate submissions.
There are now several checks to help you assess potential duplicates: this new Elsevier Duplicate Submission Check, the EM Duplicate Submission Check and the Similarity Check/iThenticate; they are compared in the table below.
Tool | Elsevier duplicate submission check | EM duplicate submission check | Similarity Check/ iThenticate |
|---|---|---|---|
What it does | Compares text similarity of the submitted manuscript with all manuscripts currently under consideration with other Elsevier journals (most Elsevier owned journals included) | Compares text and author similarity of the submitted manuscript with manuscripts previously submitted to the same journal | Compares text similarity of the submitted manuscript with published papers in most journals and web content |
Elements compared | Full manuscript | Title, abstract and author names | Full manuscript |
Use case(s) | Potential duplicate manuscripts submitted in parallel Potential paper mill submissions | Potential resubmissions to the same journal Potential paper mill submissions where parts of the manuscript (e.g. declaration of interest statement) are recycled by different authors | Potential text plagiarism |
Access via | Email notification | "Duplicate Submission Check" in "Action" menu | "Similarity Check/ iThenticate Results" link in "Action" menu |
Agreement signed with JISC
We are delighted to share the fantastic news that Jisc — the negotiating body representing UK academic research institutions — and Elsevier have collaborated to finalize a new three-year agreement.
This agreement supports authors at Jisc-UK institutions in publishing immediate open access across Elsevier journals, making UK research accessible to the world. It also allows the UK research community to continue accessing high-quality, trusted, global research across our extensive collection of journals.
The three-year agreement meets the sector’s goals to rapidly transition to open access, at reduced costs relative to what the sector is paying today. The agreement recognizes the significant investment the UK has already made in its transition to open access over the last five years, and the challenges the UK higher education sector is facing.
This is the latest in a series of agreements Elsevier has developed, in collaboration with universities around the world, to provide researchers and institutions with choices that meet their diverse needs. A dedicated page details the open access aspects of this agreement, including the impact on individual titles and the list of eligible institutions and participating journals.
Retirement of Philippe Terheggen
Following a distinguished career at Elsevier dating back to 1991, Managing Director Philippe Terheggen has retired. Laura Hassink, previously Senior Vice President of our Publishing Transformation group has taken over as Managing Director.
Philippe Terheggen
Laura has had an outstanding 24-year career at Elsevier in various publishing, strategy, and product roles. Over this time, she has built a deep understanding of the needs of the communities we serve, an extensive knowledge of the STM publishing industry and has developed strong external and internal networks.
To see the full announcement about the appointment of Laura Hassink as MD, please see the press release here.
Laura Hassink
Best practices
Getting the most from Editorial Manager
Part 2: Increasing your reviewer success rates
Part 3: Making the best selection of reviewers
Research integrity (including publishing ethics)
“I’ve seen this somewhere before!” What counts as prior publication?
Using Similarity Check reports: why you can’t just use the % Similarity Score
Getting the most from Editorial Manager
Research integrity (including publishing ethics)
Training & e-learning
Editor webinar bank
Enhance your understanding of Editorial Manager by attending, or watching a recording of, one or more of our editor webinars. Topics include; EM training, reporting options, managing author invitations, plus new topics being added regularly.
Browse and sign upopens in new tab/window
Editor Guide to Editorial Manager
The Editor Guide to Editorial Manageropens in new tab/window now includes essential learning pathways for various Editor roles. Each Editor pathway outlines key essential actions that may be required as part of the Editor role.
View the guide hereopens in new tab/window
Collection of short video guides
We have a collection of short video guidesopens in new tab/window available which cover some of the main aspects of working with Editorial Manager. Full training videosopens in new tab/window are also available.
Editor webinar: Submission platform development update
Watch the recordingopens in new tab/window of the recent editor webinar ‘Submission Platform Development Updates’ which included details of Editorial Manager’s performance and plans for 2022.
Watch the recordingopens in new tab/window
New Editor Essentials module launched: Essentials for new editorial team members (February 2022)
This module gives new editorial board members an overview of the role, responsibilities and benefits. It’s a great place for new board members to start the Editor Essentials journey.
View the moduleopens in new tab/window
New Editor Essentials module launched: staying in touch (January 2022)
A crucial part of an editor’s job is regular communication with the journal's stakeholders. To that end, this module outlines important contacts at Elsevier and when to reach out to them, best practices on communicating with an editorial team, and available tools to stay in touch with your readers and the discipline at large.