Most peer review management systems are publisher-centric rather than user-focused, and developed with an insatiable appetite for complexity. (Developers need to keep the complexity coming or they will lose their jobs.)
Really considering no longer reviewing papers for journals that use Editorial Manager. Maybe if we all go on strike they'll fix that awful website. #AcademicChatter#editorialmanager
Journals are leaving Elsevier's Editorial Manager in droves. Taylor & Francis and Springer Nature have joined the exodus. Evidential links can be found on EM's journals list pages and at https://t.co/zYcvx2eXMu. Wiley acquired eJournalPress in December 2021, so their few... pic.twitter.com/R48VOVRwJv
Also, I started the day thinking, yay, let's just submit this paper that is wholly done and complete and ready to go, quick win. FIVE HOURS OF EDITORIAL MANAGER LATER
— Dr Anna Krzywoszynska (@Anna_K_speaking) August 3, 2023
Many scholarly journals and publishers could benefit from having greater respect for the time and effort of their authors and reviewers.
I am seriously about to start declining peer review requests for new journals because it is taking SO much of my time to just access the damn manuscript. I must have dozens of logins and passwords to ScholarOne and all the other platforms. There has to be a better way.
Authors and reviewers shouldn't be required to maintain accounts with usernames and passwords when using peer review management systems like ScholarOne and Editorial Manager. Most developers wrongly assume that everyone needs to have an account. This unfortunate practice...