search

elifesciences / UX-features-roadmaps

A test attempt at moving some of the Product team feature definition and prioritisation into GitHub. The aim is to create more detailed feature definitions, provide more transparent prioritisation and more effective "linking" of product design to development tickets (currently in the xPub project board).
0 stars 0 forks source link

Peer review (features) #50

Open chris-huggins opened 5 years ago

chris-huggins commented 5 years ago

Spring 2019 BRE survey results - interesting insights into the BREs experience of finding and inviting reviewers, handling consultation, their workloads etc. https://docs.google.com/document/d/158rvCO8OOO_bceWLeiLFYryEoFFJIBUTcHCFxKZ25hs/edit#

summary slides from staff meeting - https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1QSzaJeJKwI8mny72621A70mFvY6y5o7y7VNw9e_dGLM/edit#slide=id.g5ca9fdb8f1_0_84

chris-huggins commented 5 years ago

Particularly interesting:

As an editor, it is sometimes frustrating to put a lot of work into really boiling things down to the essential revisions, and then have the authors still come back and try to argue for why they shouldn't need to do things or shouldn't do components of what was identified as an essential revision, as they would for a subset of the general mix of reviewer comments that they would get from a typical journal. For certain, sometimes we make mistakes or there are alternate ways that something can be addressed, but more often it just feels like an ingrained approach, and/or we aren't being clear enough with our wording that really, we've done them a huge favor by identifying these 3-4 things that they need to change, and that we really mean that these are ESSENTIAL.