You and your fellow EiCs across all ISI journals help us develop our ISI editors. You do this by rating the quality of the editor’s work for each paper. When you do, you also provide the editor with brief feedback about their editorship that the system emails to the editor. The rating you provide makes it possible for us to identify editors whose work needs improving and those whose work needs commendation or promotion. Our goal is to help all editors to develop their skills and to identify excellent editors for acknowledgment and eventual promotion to Associate EiC or EiC. We rely on you and your fellow EiCs to provide us with quality feedback about editor performance.

Almost all editors earn a ‘3’, exceptionally good editors earn a ‘4’ or ‘5’, and those found lacking earn a ‘2’ or ‘1’. This rating is used by all ISI journals to identify which editors can use more training and which to commend for their excellence and possibly promote. As you rate each editor, provide the editor with brief feedback on the quality of their development letter and possibly how future development letters can be more suitable.


When you accept a paper for publication, the author/s can make no further changes. The system notifies the publisher that the paper is ready for final quality assurance and publication. The publisher then reviews the paper and checks if it is ready for publication. She may contact the authors directly to check on or ask for information, such as references. Usually, the paper will be online within two weeks.