Journal Author Survey Results | Authors

90% 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.

"This was my best experience with publishing an article for the last several years. The submission process was straightforward, the reviews were obtained in a timely manner and were critical, positive and helpful. The revised manuscript was accepted promptly. The proofs were clean and the changes we did request were made accurately. This is what I would like to be able to say about all papers I submit, but I rarely find that all of these elements are so satisfactory."

Presenting

Over 46K authors from 187 countries,

publishing in over 2,400 journals

Journals Demonstrating Editorial Excellence

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.

Survey	Percentage of authors who agreed or strongly agreed*
The editors managed the peer review process well	92%
The number of peer review rounds was appropriate	92%
The review reports were useful in improving my manuscript overall	94%
The review reports were sufficiently detailed and informative	94%

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 comments are valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper as well as our future research.”

2021 JOURNAL AUTHOR SURVEY

“The comments and suggestions made were very useful and demonstrated a thorough reading of the paper, they really helped improve it. It is the best peer review I have received, I am very thankful.”

2021 JOURNAL AUTHOR SURVEY

Communication

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.

Survey	Percentage of authors who agreed or strongly agreed*
My inquiries were answered in a timely manner	90%
There was sufficient communication about the status of my paper	87%
The editorial advice and comments throughout the process helped to improve the paper	92%

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.

“I appreciated the diligence of your editorial team to respond to my emails and questions very quickly. Overall, as this was my first publishing experience the process helped me to publish well. I learned to much from this experience.”

2021 JOURNAL AUTHOR SURVEY

“The best editor comments I have ever received...AMAZING! and Thank you! It made me restructure and learn a lot in the process of revising.”

2021 JOURNAL AUTHOR SURVEY

“Your staff were great. They were very polite and professional and went beyond their duties to answer my questions and help me.”

2021 JOURNAL AUTHOR SURVEY

Production

Survey	Percentage of authors who rated the service as excellent or good*
Quality of copy editing	92%
Process of proofing	90%
Presentation of the article online	94%

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 an 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

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 quality of copy editing and process of proofing is excellent.”

2021 JOURNAL AUTHOR SURVEY

“Many thanks to people who work in the proofing process! There were many mails, modifications, but they were always friendly and helpful.”

2021 JOURNAL AUTHOR SURVEY

We are listening

As you can see, most of our authors confirm a positive publishing experience. Based on their experience, 90% 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 whole process was very collaborative and efficient. I am very appreciative of the rapid evaluation and editorial assistance as well as communication about publication timing and encouragement about social media engagement. Pediatric Nephrology is one of the best journals to publish in for these reasons alone.”

2021 JOURNAL AUTHOR SURVEY

* 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 46,350 corresponding authors in 2021.