Stack Exchange Network
Stack Exchange network consists of 181 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
Academia Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for academics and those enrolled in higher education. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Q&A for work
Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.
What does "Awaiting Reviewer Scores" mean within the context of a ScholarOne submission system?
I submitted a paper to a Taylor and Francis journal that uses the ScholarOne submission system. The manuscript status has changed from "Under Review" to "Awaiting Reviewer Scores".
What does this change mean? What is the flow chart of the different statuses for a manuscript?
6 Answers 6
With a typical ScholarOne configuration, "Awaiting Reviewer Scores" means that it is actually out with (at least some) reviewers, while "Under Review" would instead mean the previous stage, where it is being considered by the handling editor(s) and might still be rejected without review.
After the review scores come back, a manuscript then returns to the handling editor for a recommendation, and thence up to the chief editor(s) for a decision.
- 2 "Under Review" should be de-ambiguised to "Under Editorial Review" – Dmitri Zaitsev Oct 12, 2017 at 18:19
- 1 What does "MSs" stand for? – TrungDung Jan 19, 2022 at 12:22
- @TrungDung "MS" is an abbreviation for "manuscript," so "MSs" would be "manuscripts." – shoover May 19, 2022 at 21:30
None of the answers above are accurate at least in my scenario. I had a revision decision, and after I submitted the revision, the status went to "Under review", and after about 4 weeks, it has now changed to "Awaiting reviewer scores". In this case, the reviewers were already lined up to get the revision, and so it doesn't make sense for "awaiting reviewer scores" to just mean that the reviewing is in progress -- in fact, it's "under review" that means that, and it doesn't make sense for "under review" to mean pre-screening. What the "awaiting reviewer scores" most plausibly means here is that the reviews are now due! 4 weeks is also the time I'd expect the AE to allot for the reviewers (from past experience), and so the timing is right for the status to change from "Under review" to "Awaiting reviewer scores" - so it just means some reviewers haven't yet submitted it and the reviews are either due or overdue. This explanation also makes sense if you just look at the English of the status "Under review" and "Awaiting reviewer scores" -- the scores aren't awaited unless it's due! It's probably why they chose this language for the status message. In addition, for all my submissions in the past, the "Under review" status has always meant that the paper was actually with the reviewers as opposed to with the AE waiting for the assignment; papers have been in the "Under review" status for me for several months after which they change to "Awaiting AE recommendation". So it makes no sense that "Under review" means pre-screening (as suggested by one of the comments) - it may be different for different journals but I doubt that is the case for any journal.
"Awaiting Reviewer Scores" means that the paper has been assigned the minimum amount of reviewers that the Associate Editor has set for the manuscript. The minimum would be either two or three depending on the publication but the associate editor might have sent a few more invitations around. "Under Review" means that reviewers have been selected and invitations have been sent out but some of them have not responded yet or some of them have rejected the invitation and the editorial board is still looking for reviewers.
I also think that it is up to the specific settings of each journal to show the different status of the review process. In some you can see "Under Review", "Awaiting Associate Editor Recommendation", "Awaiting EIC decision" etc but in others you just see "Under review" for the whole process.
- It seems the term "Under Review" is named ambiguously, which is what causes the confusion. – Dmitri Zaitsev Oct 12, 2017 at 18:21
Yes, Indeed mine is undergoing the same process as we speak. under review basically means that your manuscript is still with the handling editor and is being reviewed if instructions were followed, thus fit enough to be sent to blind reviewers. Awaiting reviewer score, it has been sent out to selected reviewers and is still awaiting for their scores (comments).
Awaiting reviewers scores simply mean the article is with the reviewers and the journal office is waiting for the comments.
Under review also can mean that the article is being considered by the science editor for technical and English language check or it is with the subject editor and he is evaluating it for external review, or the article is with the reviewer for evaluation.
So, the former (Awaiting reviewers scores) is a direct statement that the article is with the reviewers.
- You said " Awaiting reviewers ... the article is with the reviewers ... " and " Under review ... the article is with the reviewer for evaluation. ". Would you make it more clear? – Nobody Sep 16, 2015 at 7:23
You must log in to answer this question.
Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged journals paper-submission journal-workflow ..
- Featured on Meta
- We've added a "Necessary cookies only" option to the cookie consent popup
Hot Network Questions
- Confusion About Entropy
- Do new devs get fired if they can't solve a certain bug?
- What can a lawyer do if the client wants him to be acquitted of everything despite serious evidence?
- Can the Spiritual Weapon spell be used as cover?
- Is there a solutiuon to add special characters from software and how to do it
- Does a summoned creature play immediately after being summoned by a ready action?
- What is a word for the arcane equivalent of a monastery? A place where magic is studied and practiced?
- How to tell which packages are held back due to phased updates
- Most of the entries in the NAME column of the output from lsof +D /tmp do not begin with /tmp. Why is this the case?
- How can I explain to my manager that a project he wishes to undertake cannot be performed by the team?
- Do roots of these polynomials approach the negative of the Euler-Mascheroni constant?
- Copyright issues when journal is defunct
- Is it possible to rotate a window 90 degrees if it has the same length and width?
- Is there a proper earth ground point in this switch box?
- Why is this sentence from The Great Gatsby grammatical?
- ncdu: What's going on with this second size column?
- Replacing broken pins/legs on a DIP IC package
- Who owns code in a GitHub organization?
- Is it correct to use "the" before "materials used in making buildings are"?
- Can airtags be tracked from an iMac desktop, with no iPhone?
- ERROR: CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW ... WITH DATA cannot be executed from a function
- FAA Handbooks Copyrights
- How do I connect these two faces together?
- What is the purpose of this D-shaped ring at the base of the tongue on my hiking boots?
（1）Editor in Chief（EIC），主编， 此人很重要，有稿件最终决定权。
（2）ADM- (可能是) Administrator 应该是协助主编日常工作的。（这个作用貌似一般）
（3）Associated Editor（AE） 副编辑，此人非常重要，他会在审稿人（reviewers）意见的基础上对文章作个综合评价后，给主编一个recommendation。一般主编都会按照AE的意见写最终的decision letter。
（4）Reviewer--审稿人（Regular paper一般会要求三个审稿人进行审稿），对你的文章进行审稿，并将审稿意见提交给AE。 Article submitted后（即paper提交后）： 1、awaiting admin. procession一般3－4天后就会安排主编。 2、awaiting reviewer assignment 等待指定审稿人。 主编在选择审稿人，等待审稿人回复是否同意审稿。一般在一周以内。看审稿人回复速度。 3、awaiting reviewer scores 等待审稿人审稿意见。美陶要求审稿人三周内给审稿意见。但是审稿人觉得时间时间不够，可以写信给主编要求延长审稿期限。这个时间长短要取决于审稿人是否有空看你的文章，还要看他是否守时。一般三周左右。（个人感觉美陶的审稿人还是很负责的，守时。） 4、awaiting AE assignment 等待AE的指派。编辑部在选择/联系AE。一般1－3天左右。 5、awaiting AE recommendation 等待AE的推荐。 美陶要求AE三周内给结果。一般AE比较守时。但基本都是期限的最后一两天才给结果。 6、awaiting EIC decision －激动人心的时刻。 等待主编的决定。一般3－4天。
2－accept after minor revision(withour re-review不需要再送审)
3－reconsideration after major revision.(要再送审，即要再经过审稿流程3－6)
4－reject and resubmit (拒稿重投，俗称大修。论文现在状态不能接受，但可以修改后重新再投。要重新经过审稿流程1－6)
Let me show and shortly describe the simple schema of the way of a paper through the system after its submission.
1、Awaiting admin checklist—— Administrator checks if the paper contains all necessary parts and is suitable for a review. （Administrator 会进行初步审查核实稿件是否包含了所有必要的内容，决定稿子是否适合送审。）
2、Awaiting AE assignement ——Editor-in-chief (EIC) chooses the associate editor (AE) responsible for the review process. （主编会选择一个副编辑对接下来的审稿流程负责，此人非常重要 ，他会在审稿人意见的基础上对文章作个综合评价后，给主编一个recommendation。一般主编都会按照AE的意见写最终的decision letter。）
3、Awaiting reviewer selection——AE invites at least two reviewers.（副编辑至少邀请两个审稿专家审稿。）
4、Awaiting reviewer assignment ——Reviewers decide if they accept or decline the invitation (in the second case AE invites another reviewer). （审稿专家决定接受审稿邀请，如果不接受，副编辑会邀请其他专家。）
5、Awaiting reviewer scores ——Reviewers are working on their reviews. （审稿专家审稿。）
6、Awaiting AE recommendation ——The paper received the sufficient number of reviews (usually 2) and, on their basis, AE makes recommendation to EIC.（收到足够的审稿意见，在此基础上副编辑为主编发推荐信。）
7、Awaiting EIC decision——Taking into account the reviewers´comments, AE recommendation and his own opinion, EIC makes a final decision about the paper (accept – revision – reject). （主编会综合审稿专家、副主编以及他本人的意见，对一篇稿子做出最后的决定。）
In this section:
- My paper has been accepted – what next?
- Appeals and rebuttals
- BMJ Article Transfer Service
- Abstracting and indexing
- Archiving, permissions and copyright
- Article metrics and alerts
- Correction and retraction policies
- Publication embargo
- Rapid responses
The review process
1. Awaiting Editorial Production Assistant Processing
The Editorial Production Assistant will carry out quality checks on your article at which point you may need to provide further information before your article is sent for Peer Review.
2. Awaiting Editor Assignment:
Your article has passed initial quality checks by the Editorial Production Assistant and is in the process of being assigned to an appropriate Editor who will evaluate your article for scope, quality, and fit for the journal. Papers that do not meet these criteria will be rejected.
3. Awaiting Reviewer Selection
Your article meets the Journal’s scope and has been approved for peer review. The Editorial Team are in the process of finding suitable external expert reviewers that are available to review your article. Your article may also be sent to relevant Associate Editor’s for internal review. For most articles, a minimum of two reviews are required. Articles can be sent to multiple prospective reviewers before the required number are secured.
4. Peer Review in Progress
Your article has secured the minimum number of required reviewers. Peer reviewers are given 2 weeks to submit their review of your article. On the occasion that a reviewer withdraws from the process, the Editorial Team will begin the reviewer selection process again.
5. Awaiting Editor Decision
Your article has now received the minimum number of reviews required to make a decision. The Editor will take into account the expert reviewers’ opinions to make an informed decision of accept, reject or revise.
6. In Production
Your article has been accepted and you will receive an email to confirm. Your article will move through the final quality checks and in to Production where it will be processed for publication. You will be emailed by the Production Editor with a timeline and be provided with a link to a platform called Publishing at Work where you can continue to track your article’s progress. More information about the Production process can be found here .
Answer: The status "Awaiting reviewer assignment" indicates that the editor has sent out reviewer invitations. Once the requisite number of reviewers (generally 2 to 3) accept the invitation, the status changes to "Awaiting reviewer scores" which is the equivalent of "Under review."
"Awaiting Reviewer Scores" means that the paper has been assigned the minimum amount of reviewers that the Associate Editor has set for the manuscript. The minimum would be either two or three depending on the publication but the associate editor might have sent a few more invitations around.
Awaiting Reviewer Selection, which is the next stage, means that the editor has received responses from multiple peer reviewers and is presently in the process of making a selection among them. For most manuscripts, in the first round of review, usually two peer reviewers are selected.
My manuscript submission status in manuscriptcentral changed from 'Awaiting Reviewer Assignment' to 'under review' last three days ago. But today suddenly the status changed back to ...
2020/4/27 awaiting reviewer selection. 2021/5/1 awaiting reviewer assignment. 2021/5/2 awaiting reviewer scores. 2021/5/27 decision：major revision. 2021/5/29 revision submitted. 2021/6/1 awaiting reviewer invitation. 2021/6/4 13：00 awaiting reviewer assignment. 2021/6/4 18：00 awaiting reviewer scores. 2021/7/3 10：15 awaiting final decision
2、awaiting reviewer assignment 等待指定审稿人。 主编在选择审稿人，等待审稿人回复是否同意审稿。一般在一周以内。看审稿人回复速度。 3、awaiting reviewer scores 等待审稿人审稿意见。美陶要求审稿人三周内给审稿意见。
Awaiting Reviewer Selection Your article meets the Journal's scope and has been approved for peer review. The Editorial Team are in the process of finding suitable external expert reviewers that are available to review your article. Your article may also be sent to relevant Associate Editor's for internal review.
What does it mean awaiting reviewer scores? Answer: Awaiting Reviewer Scores means that your paper is being peer reviewed. As you may know, peer review can take a while, as peer reviewers do this along with their other work.Feb 27, 2021 Advertisement What is the meaning of reviewer assigned?
Admin Dashboard （管理者ダッシュボード）に表示される査読プロセス中の論文ステータスは以下の通りです。. Awaiting Admin Checklist. 管理者による論文チェック待ち. Awaiting AE Assignment. Associate Editor の指名待ち. Awaiting Reviewer Selection. 査読者の選出待ち. Awaiting Reviewer ...
"Awaiting Reviewer Scores" means that the paper has been assigned the minimum amount of reviewers that the Associate Editor has set for the manuscript. The minimum would be either two or...