Editorial board publication strategy and acceptance rates in Turkish national journals

Purpose: This study takes advantage of newly released journal metrics to investigate whether local journals with more qualified boards have lower acceptance rates, based on data from 219 Turkish national journals and 2,367 editorial board members.Design/methodology/approach: This study argues that journal editors can signal their scholarly quality by publishing in reputable journals. Conversely, editors publishing inside articles in affiliated national journals would send negative signals. The research predicts that high(low) quality editorial boards will conduct more(less) selective evaluation and their journals will have lower(higher) acceptance rates. Based on the publication strategy of editors, four measures of board quality are defined: Number of board inside publications per editor(INSIDER), number of board Social Sciences Citation Index publications per editor(SSCI), inside-to-SSCI article ratio(ISRA), and board citation per editor(CITATION). Predictions are tested by correlation and regression analysis.Findings: Low-quality board proxies(INSIDER, ISRA) are positively, and high-quality board proxies(SSCI, CITATION) are negatively associated with acceptance rates. Further, we find that receiving a larger number of submissions, greater women representation on boards, and Web of Science and Scopus(WOSS) coverage are associated with lower acceptance rates. Acceptance rates for journals range from 12% to 91%, with an average of 54% and a median of 53%. Law journals have significantly higher average acceptance rate(68%) than other journals, while WOSS journals have the lowest(43%). Findings indicate some of the highest acceptance rates in Social Sciences literature, including competitive Business and Economics journals that traditionally have low acceptance rates. Limitations: Research relies on local context to define publication strategy of editors. Findings may not be generalizable to mainstream journals and core science countries where emphasis on research quality is stronger and editorial selection is based on scientific merit.Practical implications: Results offer useful insights into editorial management of national journals and allow us to make sense of local editorial practices. The importance of scientific merit for selection to national journal editorial boards is particularly highlighted for sound editorial evaluation of submitted manuscripts.Originality/value: This is the first attempt to document a significant relation between acceptance rates and editorial board publication behavior.

World Journal of Gastroentero1ogy Editorial Board and Reviewers Brief Introduction 2004-2006

Published by The WJG Press and Elsevier Inc．,PO Box 23451 Beijing 100023,China Fax:+86-(0)10-85381893 E-mail:wjg@wjgnet．com http://www．wjgnet．com The World Journal of Gastroenterology Editorial Board consists of 519 members,representing a team of worldwide experts in gastroenterology and hepatology．They are from 51 countries,including Albania(1),Algeria(1),Argentina(1),Australia(8), Austria(5),Belarus(1),Belgium(6),Brazil(1),Bulgaria(1),Canada(7),China(50),Costa Rica(1),Croatia(1),Denmark(6), Egypt(1),Finland(1),France(18),Germany(35),Greece(2),Hungary(2),Iceland(1),India(5),Iran(1),Ireland(1),Israel(2),Italy(41),Japan(132),Lithuania(1),Macedonia(1),Malaysia(3),Monaco(1),Netherlands(13),Norway(2),Pakistan(1),Philippines(1),Poland(2),Portugal(1),Russia(3),Singapore(2),Slovakia(1),South Africa(2),South Korea(6),Spain(20), Sri Lanka(1),Swaziland(1),Sweden(4),Switzerland(4),Turkey(3),United Kingdom(20),United States(90),Yugoslavia(1)． HONORARY EDITORS-IN-CHIEF Ke-Ji Chen,Professor Xiyuan Hospital,Chinese Tranditional Medicine University,Beijing 100091,China. kjchen@public．bta．net．

EDITORIAL REVIEW AND PUBLICATION

Peer Review.Following receipt and acceptance by CJOMS,manuscripts will be reviewed and processed for peer review.An editor of CJOMS reviews the submitted manuscripts initially.Manuscripts with insufficient priority for publication are rejected promptly.Other manuscripts are sent to external expert consultants for peer review when preliminary processing is complete.Peer reviewer identities are kept confidential,but reviewers know the iden- tities of the authors.The manuscript under review is not revealed to anyone other than peer reviewers and editorial staff.Usually two external peer re- viewers are involved in the process of peer review,but in some instance,a third reviewer is required when disagreement exists between the two review- ers.Reviewers receive printed or electronic copies of each manuscript and are asked to review these within two weeks.Reviewer comments are returned via mail or electronic means.Only these high quality manuscript with good scores from two reviewers are considered for publication,the final decision is made on a monthly workshop participated by the Editor-in-Chief,Associate Editors-in-Chief and 10 Key Editorial Members.Manuscripts that are ac- cepted for publication are announced on CJOMS web timely.Comments from the peer reviewers,CJOMS editors and workshop are submitted to au- thors for revision.Revised manuscripts are asked to return within 4 weeks.

Letter from the Editors-in-Chief

Dear readers of Neural Regeneration Research：Since the journal first launched in April 2006,Neural Regeneration Research（NRR）has come a long way.First,we would like to thank those who have served on the journal staff and its editorial board over the past 10 years,and particularly the reviewers who have provided the support and feedback necessary to enhance the scientific quality and ensure the integrity of articles.

Information for Authors-Neural Regeneration Research

About the Journal Founded in April 2006,NRR（ISSN 1673-5374,e ISSN 1876-7958）is an open-accessed journal copublished by Wolters Kluwer-Medknow,with its mission focused on reporting high quality and novel scientific advancements in the field of neural regeneration.

The 3^(rd) Work Meeting of the 2^(nd) Editorial Board Committee of China City Planning Review Convened

On Oct.25,2015,the 3rd Work Meeting of the 2nd Editorial Board Committee of China City Planning Review(abbreviated as CCPR hereafter)was convened at the School of Architecture,Tsinghua University in Beijing.The Editorial Board members participated in the meeting.At the meeting,the Editorial Department of CCPR presented a Work Report of the 2nd Editorial Board Committee(2013–2015)and a Work Report of the Editorial Department,followed by open discussions.