The authors’ advocates: how Springer journal editors help authors

Author: Marieke Cambeen

Executive Vice President, Springer Journals portfolio

Editors and editorial board members (EBMs) for Springer journals come from the community of publishing researchers. And because they are, these journal editors typically act as advocates for article authors, working hard to get submissions reviewed in a timely fashion, helping improve the manuscripts, and mediating polarised reviewer opinions. And, a lot of this work takes place behind the scenes, largely invisible to most journal authors. So, it’s time we try to make some of these efforts more visible. Understanding what editors actually do — and what motivates them — can change the way authors approach the publishing process.

Revealing what journal editors do

Springer journal editors are volunteers (although some do receive modest stipends) whose main work — like their authors’ — is in research. Editors-in-Chief typically recruit editors and EMBs from among researchers whose work they know. This means that editors and EBMs are actively contributing research to their communities, so they’re familiar both with current research as well as with journals from the authors’ perspective. 

What these editors do, mainly, is working to facilitate publication of new research; not mainly to gate-keep. They do want to assure that published work is of high enough quality; but that’s to support ongoing work in the community, not simply to artificially keep things out.

These researchers volunteer their time to help shepherd research from, and for, their communities to publication. The 2,700 Springer journals tend to focus on specific discipline communities, so the work these editors do directly supports their own colleagues and communities; that’s one of the reasons why this work is so important to them

While this is one of the most highly valued tasks, editors find it the most challenging. Finding reviewers — especially the right reviewers — is hard, and getting harder as submission volume grows. 49% of Springer editors polled cited this as their biggest frustration (possibly even more than keeping reviewers prompt in completing their reviews). So, authors should know that the effort these editors invest behind the scenes is more than just significant.

How editors help improve articles

Editors do more than process peer review and accept or reject (although that process is both critical and difficult — see more below). They also actively work to help improve your article manuscript, to make it the best version of itself. Authors consistently describe editors’ input as transformative, and not just, “accept/reject/revise.” Across multiple years’ worth of author surveys, authors cite editorial advice as one of the most celebrated aspects of the publishing experience. They speak of editors who “spotted weak parts,” helped them “restructure and learn,” and demonstrated “great depth of information about the topic.” 

Reflecting on their experience working with the Journal on Audio, Speech, and Music Processing, Haixin Zhao and Nilesh Madhu said,
 

“Our experience with this paper was extremely positive, with reviewers, editor and us engaging in a meaningful discussion during the review process. This led to a much stronger paper, as a whole, and also gave us new insights into how we could extend this work in future.”

This role as “development editor” — actively improving manuscripts — is a role that Springer journal editors take particular pride in. Improving submission quality is the number one new responsibility they would choose to take on. 

This means that when a journal editor sends a manuscript back to the author for revision, it’s not a meaningless request to make the author’s life more complicated; it’s meant to improve the final article. And improving the article can profoundly benefit the author, because a better article will have more impact, and that impact redounds back to the research, and to the author. (It also supports the journal as well, which is a win-win-win.)

How editors help support early career and first-time authors

Springer journal editors, with their community focus, are especially supportive of first-time and early career authors. Feedback from these authors consistently highlights how essential, and helpful, the personalised, human editorial communication they get from journal editors is to them. Editors help these authors navigate the publishing process for the first time, patiently guiding them “step by step,” and answering even basic questions about the process. This leaves these new authors feeling genuinely supported at a high-stakes moment early in their careers. 

And editors find this work fulfilling (although they sometimes don’t feel recognised for it — hopefully blogs like this one help rectify that). 77% of Springer journal editors feel that their journal recognises the value that they add.

How to work with an editor, not just “through” them

Knowing that your editor is a deeply engaged peer, rather than an administrator, is only useful if you act on it. A few things are worth bearing in mind:
 

• Respond to editorial feedback as a dialogue, not a verdict. Editors are not simply relaying reviewer comments — they’ve already filtered, interpreted, and often moderated those comments on your behalf. Their framing matters.
• Be specific about what you need. Editors who go beyond the call of duty tend to do so when authors give them something to work with. If a section of your manuscript has a known weakness, name it. You may find the response is more substantive than you’d expect.
• For early-career researchers especially, ask. The authors who describe their experience as formative are, almost universally, those who engaged. Questions that feel basic to ask are rarely basic to answer — and editors in this field have seen the full range.
• Understand that timelines often reflect workload, not indifference. Finding reviewers is the single biggest frustration cited by editors across the portfolio—a constraint that shapes timelines in ways that have nothing to do with the quality of your submission.

Editors’ human connection 

When we talk about journals, peer review, and scholarly communications, something gets lost. Among the talk of submission portals and peer review pain points, the relationship between author and editor, which is one of the most genuinely human interactions in scholarly publishing, can get lost in the noise. 

It’s worth realising that the intrinsic reward of the work itself, which includes engaging with emerging science, shaping the field, feeling the respect of peers, is what sustains most editors. And it’s worth approaching the relationship accordingly.

If you’re preparing to submit, or navigating the process for the first time, our author resources cover every stage—from choosing the right journal to responding to reviewers. 

Find out more about how to find the Springer journal that might fit your work best, and how to put your next submission together.

Related Content

• Springer: A legacy shaped with research communities 
• Starting your career? Here’s how Springer can help you publish open access
• The story of Springer’s first open access book