Nature Communications

Abstract

Peer review is an essential aspect of the publishing process; journals and the research community have a shared interest in it being a constructive process.Peer review, at its best, should aim to provide authors and editors with rigorous and constructive feedback resulting in an improved study.This system, like any, has its deficiencies and finding productive ways to improve it is important.For example, authors are often frustrated by a seemingly opaque process, and providing more transparency into how papers are selected for publication is a goal for this journal.To this end, Nature Cell Biology editors give talks at conferences and research centres to inform authors and referees of the key factors that guide editorial decisions and the referee selection process.Commonly in the biological sciences, professional or academic editors shepherd papers through a single-blind peer review process.A group of stem cell researchers have recently advocated greater transparency in the process, specifically requesting that journals release referee reports and the correspondence between authors and editors for published manuscripts (http://www.eurostemcell.org/commentanalysis/peer-review