OJS OCS OMP OHS

You are viewing the PKP Support Forum | PKP Home Wiki



Moving from Round 1 to 2 - no access to Round 1 information

Are you an Editor, Author, or Journal Manager in need of help? Want to talk to us about workflow issues? This is your forum.

Moderators: jmacgreg, michael, vgabler, John

Forum rules
This forum is meant for general questions about the usability of OJS from an everyday user's perspective: journal managers, authors, and editors are welcome to post questions here, as are librarians and other support staff. We welcome general questions about the role of OJS and how the workflow works, as well as specific function- or user-related questions.

What to do if you have general, workflow or usability questions about OJS:

1. Read the documentation. We've written documentation to cover from OJS basics to system administration and code development, and we encourage you to read it.

2. take a look at the tutorials. We will continue to add tutorials covering OJS basics as time goes on.

3. Post a question. Questions are always welcome here, but if it's a technical question you should probably post to the OJS Technical Support subforum; if you have a development question, try the OJS Development subforum.

Moving from Round 1 to 2 - no access to Round 1 information

Postby phil » Wed May 26, 2010 3:48 pm

Dear OJS Team;

Senario:

1. Author is required to Resubmit for Review (this will trigger Round 2). The author is also required to provide a supplementary file with comments that directly address the concerns of Round 1 Reviewers. Total files on resubmission = at least 2 files.

2. The Editor resubmits the revised article to Round 2 of peer review. However, he can only select one file to forward to the next round. Not two.

3. The Editors considers it important (read insist) that the original round 1 reviewer also review the revised article AND that the reviewer have access to his/her original review (either in the form or an uploaded doc) AND ideally also have access to the originally submitted article (for comparative purposes).

The problems therefore that are being brought to my attention are:

- only 1 file moved into the second round of review, depriving reviewer of author's direct response
- no access of the round 2 reviewer(s) to their original review or to the original article

I'm wondering if there is a solution - or practical work around - to any of these issues. I'm also wondering if, amongst other journals managers, if this a shared problem and what approaches have been taken to it.

Thanks,

/phil
phil
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:54 pm

Re: Moving from Round 1 to 2 - no access to Round 1 information

Postby phil » Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:03 am

Dear PKPSupport Team;

I'm wondering if any of you can offer any words of wisdom or advice regarding working (around) with this issue?

Thank you very much,

/phil
phil
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:54 pm

Re: Moving from Round 1 to 2 - no access to Round 1 information

Postby jmacgreg » Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:45 pm

Hi Phil,

Hrm. I can see a couple of workarounds:

1. Insist that any changes be tracked in the same document with Track Changes (I believe most document suites support this kind of functionality). You'll have the one progressively-reviewed file that will contain a history of all revisions in it, and the system will also contain a history of uploaded files, which could conceivably help if a dispute crops up. However, I'm no Track Changes expert, and I'm unsure how far you can push it (ie. how many rounds of review) before the feature starts to seriously impact readability.

2. "Attach" the old revision to the end of the new by copy&paste, so that the one doc contains both revisions. This would be a pretty clunky workaround.

I haven't seen any requests for this kind of access before from other Editors, but if other think it might be a good use case, I'm sure we'd be happy to consider it as a feature request.

Cheers,
James
jmacgreg
 
Posts: 4181
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:50 am

Re: Moving from Round 1 to 2 - no access to Round 1 information

Postby aleskl » Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:35 am

I recently encountered the same problem as Phil above.

The usual review process in our journal is that authors submit a revisioned version (after review round 1) and separate detailed step-by-step explanations what was corrected or not according to the review. Using track changes or comments for explanations is not an option, because that would introduce text into the manuscript that will not be a part of the paper and would only confuse things. Plus, some of our authors do not work in Word, so they don't have this option (they work eg. in LaTeX).

So now we have one paper in the second round of review, where the authors submitted a revised version of the paper and two additional files with comments for each of the two reviewers. What is the best way now to invite the same reviewers for the second round of review and pass them the author comments? Should we copy & paste the text from the additional file into the email that will be sent to the reviewer?

For future papers, what is the best way for authors to submit their responses to the reviewers in the second round? Can this be done automatically authors to reviewers, or the should be passed on the reviewers by the editor?

Cheers,
Ales
aleskl
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:08 am

Re: Moving from Round 1 to 2 - no access to Round 1 information

Postby jmacgreg » Tue Jan 24, 2012 11:14 pm

Hi Ales,

This is a somewhat tricky workflow, but I think it's probably common enough that we should have a better way to address it. I believe we usually suggest that any detailed correspondence from author to reviewer be attached to the revised document itself (for example, as additional attached pages); or attach the revisions as a supplementary file (though care will have to be taken that this file isn't subsequently published along with the completed submission, which can conceivably be the case if you have configured OJS to publish supplementary files, and if your layout manager doesn't delete the supplementary file during the layout editing process).

In the meantime, I've filed a feature request here. Please feel free to CC yourself to that report for future updates, and also add any further comments as you see fit. As I mentioned in that report, I do believe that this kind of functionality is or will be present in OMP, and so it's probably just a matter of time before it is available for OJS. But it's still worth adding as a request.

Cheers,
James
jmacgreg
 
Posts: 4181
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:50 am

Re: Moving from Round 1 to 2 - no access to Round 1 informat

Postby csabbah » Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:29 pm

Hello,

A possible solution to this problem is that the managing editor looks for the files of round 1 by browsing files.
However, I do not see how to recover the various comments which have been copied and pasted by clicking on the bubbles.
Is it possible to have access to the corresponding text files ?

Another possibility is, before switching to Round 2, to keep the various comments in bubbles by saving them as submission notes.
However, I got a problem with creating a new submission note in 2.4.2.0, although it worked perfectly in 2.3.8.

Thank you
Claude Sabbah
csabbah
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 11:13 am

Re: Moving from Round 1 to 2 - no access to Round 1 informat

Postby zmand » Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:48 pm

Hello,

we use OJS 2.3.6 version and are indeed not happy with the same problem described by Phil.
Is there any solution on this problem in the newer versions of OJS? I've noticed that feature request was filed but found no further response on this matter.

Is there any new advice ?

Thanks,

Zoran
zmand
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 12:39 pm

Re: Moving from Round 1 to 2 - no access to Round 1 informat

Postby asmecher » Fri Jan 31, 2014 4:30 pm

Hi Zoran,

This will be addressed in OJS 3.0, but likely not before. The file model in OJS 3.0 permits multiple files to be used in review, rather than forcing the Editor to choose a single file upon which to begin the next review; in the meantime I'd suggest the "Track Changes" workaround suggested by James above.

Regards,
Alec Smecher
Public Knowledge Project Team
asmecher
 
Posts: 8314
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:56 pm


Return to OJS Editorial Support and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests