2008 Editor Report

Here is the printed version of the report of the editor as presented to the ARIA meeting on August 2008. SUBMISSIONS AND PUBLICATION STATISTICS (JULY 14, 2008) Table 1 providesresubmissions, since a new submission number is assigned to a manuscript resubmitted after revisions. The numbers in Table 2 reflect only new submissions. This manner of presentation has a significant effect on the numbers and particularly on the acceptance rates. The second table shows higher acceptance rates because the manuscripts returned for revision in the first table are counted as rejected in the first round, whereas the total number of accepted manuscripts does not change. The average processing time is also affected by the second way of presenting statistics in Table 2 since the peer-review process is shorter in the second run. The average processing time in Table 2 applies to the first submission, whereas that in Table 1 is the average over the total number of rounds for which the article receives a different manuscript number. Many journals publish the type of statistics shown in Table 2 since they seem to have the greatest influence over where authors decide to submit their articles for publication. They also give a better assessment of the new submissions and the acceptance rates. Since January 2007, we have been suggesting a 3-month deadline to the referees. We have also adopted a screening process that allows us to return a manuscript to the author without a referee report. This is usually done by an associate editor whose expert knowledge on the subject qualifies him to decide whether to reject the article or send it to referees. The two main reasons for returning an article after the screening process are (1) a low probability it will measure up to the standards of the JRI and (2) lack of any link between the content of the article and the mission of the JRI. We still have to improve the screening process. The last column of both tables provides the international submission rates. An article is considered international if the affiliation of the corresponding author is outside the United States. In previous years, the criterion was not exactly the same. An article was considered international if the affiliation of any one of its authors was outside the United States. We have chosen this new criterion because it better highlights the international status of the article. It is also easier to manage. As the numbers show, the JRI's international profile has developed substantially since 1999. More than 50 percent of the articles submitted come from outside the United States. In 2008, up to now, 33 of the 64 new articles submitted have been of foreign origin. Tables 3 and 4 give the publication statistics, and Table 5 presents the status of manuscripts according to year. Following the measures adopted last year, the backlog has been significantly reduced in the 3 years preceding the current year. Only 25 articles accepted before 2008 have not yet been published; 12 of the 37 accepted articles in the total backlog will be published in the September issue, and about 12 will be published in the December issue. Table 6 presents waiting periods for the first decision, measured in months. As you can see, the screening process during the first month was being less heavily used in 2007 than in previous years, whereas in 2008, it has been improved (12/48). We should mention that 2007 was a transitional year for the editorial office. Table 7 relates the new submissions with the numbers of published articles and that of resubmissions by year. We observe that the number of published articles has increased over the recent years. We should publish about 48 articles in 2008. In 2007, Internet readership was 8 percent higher than that in 2006: 158,311 downloads via Blackwell Synergy and other online hosts were registered. JRI subscriptions to the automatic e-mail table of contents alert (e-toc) service totaled 740 in 2007, an increase of 17 percent. …