Number Of Submissions Research Articles

There is no easy fix to peer review but paying referees and regulating the number of submissions might help

The exponential increase in the number of submissions, further accelerated by generative AI, and the decline in the availability of experts are burdening the peer review process. This has led to high unethical desk rejection rates, a growing appeal for the publication of unreviewed preprints, and a worrying proliferation of predatory journals. The idea of monetarily compensating peer reviewers has been around for many years; maybe, it is time to take it seriously as one way to save the peer review process. Here, I argue that paying reviewers, when done in a fair and transparent way, is a viable solution. Like the case of professional language editors, part-time or full-time professional reviewers, managed by universities or for-profit companies, can be an integral part of modern peer review. Being a professional reviewer could be financially attractive to retired senior researchers and to researchers who enjoy evaluating papers but are not motivated to do so for free. Moreover, not all produced research needs to go through peer review, and thus persuading researchers to limit submissions to their most novel and useful research could also help bring submission volumes to manageable levels. Overall, this paper reckons that the problem is not the peer review process per se but rather its function within an academic ecosystem dominated by an unhealthy culture of ‘publish or perish’. Instead of reforming the peer review process, academia has to look for better science dissemination schemes that promote collaboration over competition, engagement over judgement, and research quality and sustainability over quantity.

Effectiveness of automated corrective feedback on EFL learners’ writing proficiency and perception

ABSTRACT With the advancement of computer technology, an automated corrective feedback (ACF) system has been developed to provide immediate feedback for self-corrections to improve learners’ writing quality. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impacts of students’ writing behaviour, number of revisions, and perceived usefulness of the ACF system on EFL students’ writing performance. The study used a pre-test/post-test experimental design with convenience sampling. The pre-test, post-test, and three writing tasks were administered to 121 participants in the experimental and control groups, with t-tests and multiple regression analysis used. Results indicated that the experimental group outperformed the control group after ACF intervention. The writing behaviours were significantly correlated with the perceived usefulness of the ACF application. Only drafting behaviour was found to be a significant predictor of ACF perceived usefulness. However, no significant relationships were found between the number of submissions, perceived usefulness of ACF, and writing behaviour and student writing performance. Based on the findings of the investigation, pedagogical implications, limitations, and future research directions were identified and discussed.

Co-worker unprofessional behaviour and patient safety risks: an analysis of co-worker reports across eight Australian hospitals.

A key component of professional accountability programmes is online reporting tools that allow hospital staff to report co-worker unprofessional behaviour. Few studies have analysed data from these systems to further understand the nature or impact of unprofessional behaviour amongst staff. Ethos is a whole-of-hospital professional accountability programme that includes an online messaging system. Ethos has now been implemented across multiple Australian hospitals. This study examined reported unprofessional behaviour that staff indicated created a risk to patient safety. This study included 1310 Ethos submissions reporting co-worker unprofessional behaviour between 2017 and 2020 across eight Australian hospitals. Submissions that indicated the behaviour increased the risk to patient safety were identified. Descriptive summary statistics were presented for reporters and subjects of submissions about unprofessional behaviour. Logistic regression was applied to examine the association between each unprofessional behaviour (of the six most frequently reported in the Ethos submissions) and patient safety risk reported in the submissions. The descriptions in the reports were reviewed and the patient safety risks were coded using a framework aligned with the World Health Organization's International Classification for Patient Safety. Of 1310 submissions about unprofessional behaviour, 395 (30.2%) indicated that there was a risk to patient safety. Nurses made the highest number of submissions that included a patient safety risk [3.47 submissions per 100 nursing staff, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.09-3.9] compared to other professional groups. Medical professionals had the highest rate as subjects of submissions for unprofessional behaviour with a patient safety risk (5.19 submissions per 100 medical staff, 95% CI: 4.44-6.05). 'Opinions being ignored' (odds ratio: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.23-2.22; P < .001) and 'someone withholding information which affects work performance' were behaviours strongly associated with patient safety risk in the submissions (odds ratio: 2.50; 95% CI: 1.73-3.62; P < .001) compared to submissions without a patient safety risk. The two main types of risks to patient safety described were related to clinical process/procedure and clinical administration. Commonly reported events included staff not following policy or protocol; doctors refusing to review a patient; and interruptions and inadequate information during handover. Our findings indicate that unprofessional behaviour was associated with risks to patient safety. Co-worker reports about unprofessional behaviour have significant value as they can be used by organizations to better understand how unprofessional behaviour can disrupt work practices and lead to risks to patient safety.

Peer review statement

All conference organisers/editors are required to declare details about their peer review. Therefore, please provide the following information:• Type of peer review: Single-blind / Double-blind / Triple-blind / Open / Other (please describe) Single blind • Conference submission management system: Morresises • Number of submissions received: 74 • Number of submissions sent for review: 74 • Number of submissions accepted: 47 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 63.51 % • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 5 • Contact person for queries: Dr. VijethEmail: vijethhebri@gmail.comAffiliation: Assistant Professor Department of Physics Nagaland University (A Central University), Lumami, Zunheboto Dist. NagalandDr. Ganesha HEmail: ganeshkumar4006@gmail.comAffiliation: Department of Chemistry Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan Rd, Lat Yao, Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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 Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 24• Number of submissions sent for review: 24• Number of submissions accepted: 23• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 95.8• Average number of reviews per paper: 3• Total number of reviewers involved: 27• Contact person for queries: Name: WindEurope Conference Team Email: conference@windeurope.org Affiliation: WindEurope

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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: Double Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 41• Number of submissions sent for review: 36• Number of submissions accepted: 32• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 78.0 %• Average number of reviews per paper: 2.00• Total number of reviewers involved: 33Contact person for queries:Name: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tran Tan VietAffiliation: Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HCMUT), Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh CityEmail: trantanviet@hcmut.edu.vn

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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 anonymous. Conference submission management system: Morressier. Number of submissions received: 414. Number of submissions sent for review: 176. Number of submissions accepted: 65. Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 15.7%. Average number of reviews per paper: 2.00. Total number of reviewers involved: 29. Contact person for queries:Name: Xiaona FengAffiliation: Chinese Society of Micro-nano TechnologyEmail: xiaona_feng@csmnt.org.cn

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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: Undefined• Conference submission management system: ICMEAS2022• Number of submissions received: 134• Number of submissions sent for review: 110• Number of submissions accepted: 45• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 33.6• Average number of reviews per paper: 2• Total number of reviewers involved: 90• Contact person for queries: Name: Md Sayem Hossain Bhuiyan Email: sayem@me.mist.ac.bd Affiliation: Associate Professor, Military Institute of Science and Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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: Double Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 41• Number of submissions sent for review: 40• Number of submissions accepted: 27• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 65.9• Average number of reviews per paper: 1.78• Total number of reviewers involved: 10• Contact person for queries: Name: Dr. Rizka Amalia, S.K.Pm., M.Si. Email: icafosy@ub.ac.id Affiliation: Department Socio Economics Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Brawijaya

Peer Review Statement

1. Type of peer review: Single anonymous2. Conference submission management system: Morressier3. Number of submissions received: 904. Number of submissions sent for review: 905. Number of submissions accepted: 566. Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 62.2 %7. Average number of reviews per paper: 1.118. Total number of reviewers involved: 79. Contact person for queries:Name: Novriany AmaliyahAffiliation: Hasanuddin UniversityEmail: novriany@unhas.ac.id

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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.1. Type of peer review: Single anonymous2. Conference submission management system: Morressier3. Number of submissions received: 914. Number of submissions sent for review: 885. Number of submissions accepted: 576. Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 62 %7. Average number of reviews per paper: 4.408. Total number of reviewers involved: 209. Contact person for queries:Name: Prof. Dr. Ir. Slamet Imam Wahyudi, DEAAffiliation: Sultan Agung Islamic universityEmail: wahyudi@unissula.ac.id

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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.1. Type of peer review: Double anonymous2. Conference submission management system: Morressier3. Number of submissions received: 3084. Number of submissions sent for review: 2935. Number of submissions accepted: 1346. Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 43.5 %7. Average number of reviews per paper: 2.098. Total number of reviewers involved: 379. Contact person for queries:Name: Assoc. Prof. Dave Mangindaan, PhD, MRSC, AMIChemE, ASEAN Eng.Affiliation: Bina Nusantara UniversityEmail: dave.mangindaan@binus.ac.id

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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 Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 22• Number of submissions sent for review: 22• Number of submissions accepted: 21• Acceptance Rate: 21/22x100%= 94.45%• Average number of reviews per paper: 1.3181818181818181• Total number of reviewers involved: 4• Contact person for queries: Name: Abd. Aziz Amin Email: asic@ub.ac.id Affiliation: Universitas Brawijaya - Universitas Brawijaya Fakultas Perikanan dan Ilmu Kelautan

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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: Open Review• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 26• Number of submissions sent for review: 26• Number of submissions accepted: 24• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 92.3• Average number of reviews per paper: 1.25• Total number of reviewers involved: 30• Contact person for queries: Name: Javier Jimenez Email: jjsendin@gmail.com Affiliation: U. Politecnica Madrid

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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: Open Review• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 43• Number of submissions sent for review: 38• Number of submissions accepted: 36• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 83.7• Average number of reviews per paper: 1.25• Total number of reviewers involved: 52• Contact person for queries: Name: Josh Sheng Email: eeitconf@163.com Affiliation: Wuhan Zhuoxin Yuantou Information Consulting Co. LTD

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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 Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 6• Number of submissions sent for review: 6• Number of submissions accepted: 6• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 100• Average number of reviews per paper: 1• Total number of reviewers involved: 6• Contact person for queries: Name: Trinh Xuan Hoang Email: txhoang@iop.vast.vn Affiliation: Institute of Physics, Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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 Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 14• Number of submissions sent for review: 14• Number of submissions accepted: 14• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 100• Average number of reviews per paper: 2• Total number of reviewers involved: 10• Contact person for queries: Name: Yan Hao Email: hy_cmrs@163.com Affiliation: Chinese Materials Research Society

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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 Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 53• Number of submissions sent for review: 51• Number of submissions accepted: 50• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 94.3• Average number of reviews per paper: 1.96• Total number of reviewers involved: 24• Contact person for queries: Name: Honghu Tang Email: honghu.tang@csu.edu.cn Affiliation: Central South University

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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 Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 178• Number of submissions sent for review: 135• Number of submissions accepted: 89• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 50• Average number of reviews per paper: 3• Total number of reviewers involved: 20• Contact person for queries: Name: Xuexia Ye Email: xx.ye@keoaeic.org Affiliation: AEIC Academic Exchange Information Centre

Peer Review Statement

All papers published in this volume have been 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 Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier• Number of submissions received: 28• Number of submissions sent for review: 28• Number of submissions accepted: 28• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 100• Average number of reviews per paper: 1.04• Total number of reviewers involved: 27• Contact person for queries: Name: Nikolai Pogorelov Email: np0002@uah.edu Affiliation: The University of Alabama in Huntsville