More than the Quantity: The Value of Editorial Reviews for a User-Generated Content Platform

We investigate an editorial review program for which a review platform supplements user reviews with editorial ones written by professional writers. Specifically, we examine whether and how editorial reviews influence subsequent user reviews (reviews written by noneditor reviewers). A quasiexperiment conducted on a leading review platform in Asia, based on several econometric and natural language processing techniques, yields empirical evidence of an overall positive effect of editorial reviews on subsequent user reviews from the platform’s perspective. First, more reviews are provided for restaurants that receive editorial reviews. In addition, these reviews discuss substantive topics while also including a discussion on other topics, leading to a net increase in content length and variety. They also are more neutral in sentiment and are associated with lower rating valences. Further analysis of the mechanism reveals that the subsequent user reviews of the restaurants that receive editorial reviews become more similar to the editorial reviews in regard to topics, sentiment/rating, length, and readability, indicating a herding effect in how to write a review as the main driver of the change in the subsequent reviews. We further empirically isolate this herding effect among long-time reviewers. The findings suggest that review platforms could use an editorial review program not only to boost the quantitative aspect of user reviews but also, to manage the qualitative aspect as well. This paper was accepted by Kartik Hosanagar, information systems.

The Journal Review Process

This chapter reviews the journal submission and review process, starting with navigating manuscript submission sites and proceeding through editorial review, peer review, editorial decisions, revising and resubmitting manuscripts, developing reviewer response letters, finalizing manuscripts, and correcting publisher proofs. The chapter provides an in-depth tutorial on responding to reviewer requests, prioritizing which requests to respond to first, how to respond to different editorial styles, and how to use the response letter to “push back” against reviewer requests without being combative. The chapter also offers suggestions for handling conflicting reviewer requests, requests for new analyses, and how to revise a paper when new analyses change the message or take away previously significant findings.

Meet the Journal’s Editorial Review Board Members

I am honored to take on the role as Editor-in-Chief (EIC) of the International Journal of Orofacial Myology and Myofunctional Therapy (IJOM).To prepare for my role as EIC, I set two major goals to address today’s quickly evolving publication standards and the expansion and growth of the discipline of orofacial myofunctional disorders. The first was to establish an on-line submission and review process and an on-line archive for all past articles. The second critical goal was to recruit and enlist an international group of highly respected scientists and doctoral-level practitioners who represent diverse topics related to orofacial myofunctional disorders and therapy to serve on the journal’s Editorial Review Board (ERB). I am proud to introduce this new slate of ERB members.

Peer review declaration

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single Blind Review • Conference submission management system: E-mail Submission ([email protected]) • Number of submissions received: 594 • Number of submissions sent for review: 376 • Number of submissions accepted: 298 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 50.2 % • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 to 3 (Screening review, technical review and editorial review) • Total number of reviewers involved: 124 • Any additional info on review process: The conference received full length papers. The papers have been assigned to screening to check for scope, technical merit & similarity level. The papers passed in the screening have been assigned reviewers. The conference followed single blind review in which the reviewers know the author details of the paper & the authors were not disclosed the reviewer details. The reviewers were asked to evaluate the papers based on the following criteria’s: Scope, Technical Relevance, Preciseness, Contribution, Novelty, Originality, Technical merit & the quality of figures & tables. The reviewers have also given detailed comments for the papers assigned to them. • Contact person for queries (please include: name, affiliation, institutional email address) Name : Dr. Kumaravelan R, Prof, Velalar College of Engineering & Technology, Tamil Nadu, India E-mail IDs : [email protected] , [email protected] Please submit this form along with the rest of your files on the submission date written in your publishing agreement. The information you provide will be published as part of your proceedings.

Biopolymers advances in Medical Sciences: An Editorial Review

Biomaterials a term is used to describe the materials which are typically derived from any biological source. In generally it is said that these are the materials which are used within the human body to perform certain functions such as therapies1. The applications of polymers in the field of medicine have already gave birth to polymer science as a field. As we can see today, almost every polymer have been reported for use in any kind of clinical intervention, they are inseparable part of us now. Polymers are key players in clinical medicine as they are fundamental components of permanent prosthetic devices such as diameter vascular grafts, artificial lenses, catheters, hip implants etc., and the research is continued to perfect the performance and stability of polymers in vitro and in vivo2. However, the use of polymers in surgery is somewhat confined to connective tissue replacements. Interestingly, polymers have opened new horizons for drug delivery and gene therapy treatments such as nucleic-acid based drugs and protein-based drugs which cannot be taken up as typical pills, are providing impulsion for contemporary implantable polymers. The applications of polymers in tissue engineering are also gaining spotlight as these materials helps in the regeneration of 3D- (three-dimensional) organ and tissue structures.