Journal author satisfaction

What our journal authors are saying about us – and what you can expect

89% of Springer Nature journal authors rated their overall experience with the publication process as excellent or good. Here – in more detail – is what they told us about the key factors.

We would like to take this opportunity to thank all authors for trusting us with their honest feedback. This helps us in providing the best service possible for the author community. 

Here, you can read about our authors’ experience of publishing in one of our journals, see what we’re doing to improve author experience, and learn what to expect if you are yet to have published in one of our journals.

"I'd say my publication process in Human Ecology was a very good experience. I received outstanding support not only from the Editor-in-Chief and his team, who were very cooperative and helpful, but also from the reviewers, who provided valuable suggestions to improve my manuscript. Not to mention the Springer Nature editorial team, who were always supportive."


  • Over 46,000 authors from 193 countries,

    publishing in over 2,400 journals

Peer review

Our extensive reviewer network ensures the best reviews for our authors’ submissions, and that the work we publish stands up to the highest level of scrutiny. We continuously invest in innovations and improvements in peer review to bring the best process to all the research communities we serve. 


Percentage of authors who agreed or strongly agreed*

The editors managed the peer review process well


The number of peer review rounds was appropriate


The review reports were useful in improving my manuscript overall


The review reports were sufficiently detailed and informative94%

What are we doing to improve?

Springer Nature Reviewer Finder

Our Reviewer Finder helps editors to find the best experts for your manuscript quickly. It helps minimize the time you have to wait for your review reports. The tool uses an algorithm that provides a list of potential reviewers for a manuscript by matching it with researchers who have previously published similar papers. 

“The reviewers of our manuscript showed mastery of the topic and their comments really helped us to detail the information and improve the quality of the paper.”


“I am very much thankful to all reviewers, for the comments and review reports which helped to improve my manuscript.” 



We understand that transparent communication, fast communication channels and relevant information are important to you. Your feedback encourages us to continue looking for better solutions. 


Percentage of authors who agreed or strongly agreed*

My inquiries were answered in a timely manner


There was sufficient communication about the status of my paper


The editorial advice and comments throughout the process helped to improve the paper


What are we doing to improve? 

Springer Nature In Review

We are opening up the “Black Box” of the editorial and review process with innovative platforms like In Review, developed in collaboration with Research Square. Articles on In Review get an “Editorial Timeline” that shows you where your article is in the review process (e.g., when the Editor invited reviewers; when their reports arrived, etc.) so you can keep up-to-date with your article’s progress.

“The quality and speed of the communication with the journal's editorial team was the best that I have experienced in my many years of publishing scientific articles.”


“The editor demonstrated a great depth of information about the topic, and with constructive comments, immensely helped to improve the overall quality of our paper. We truly appreciate his editing inputs to our manuscript.” 


“The best experience ever! The editors were efficient in time and spotted weak parts of the article that needed improvement. Thank you so much.”




Percentage of authors who rated the service as excellent or good*

Quality of copy editing


Process of proofing  


Presentation of the article online


What are we doing to improve? 

New automated conversion and document creation

We do our best to increase speed and efficiency and recently rolled out a new workflow for automated metadata and content extraction from article manuscripts. It pre-fills data in the peer review system and ensures that our production teams have all files they need in a usable format.


e.Proofing offers our authors an easy way of making corrections to their article –  online. It speeds up the proofing process and minimizes correction-related errors.

“The standard of correction process, proof reading and final proof was excellent. The quality of the final publication is state of the art and world class.”


“All in all it was a great learning experience for us as new authors to your great journal. We feel very satisfied that we were given more than fair access to receive assistance to make our manuscript worthy of publication and we feel deep gratitude towards your journal, Editor-in-Chief, editorial team and production staff. We strongly believe that our case going through this review and successful publication should be used as a benchmark for other journals.”


We are listening

As you can see, most of our authors confirm a positive publishing experience. Based on their experience, 91% are likely to publish with us again. We are very pleased about that, but critique and suggestions are at least as valuable for us! 

Would you like to learn more about our innovative services for authors?

“The entire process was hallmarked by efficiency, precision and all-round competence.”


*All areas we cover in the satisfaction survey are rated on a 5-point scale: poor (1), below average (2), average (3), good (4), excellent (5) or strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), neutral (3), agree (4), strongly agree (5). The survey was completed by 42,471 corresponding authors in 2022.