posted on 2020-04-30, 10:01authored byMarcel Ausloos, Olgica Nedic, Aleksandar Dekanski
This
paper presents a novel method for finding features in the analysis of variable
distributions stemming from time series. We apply the methodology to the case
of submitted and accepted papers in peer-reviewed journals. We provide a
comparative study of editorial decisions for papers submitted to two
peer-reviewed journals: the Journal of the Serbian Chemical Society (JSCS) and
this MDPI Entropy journal. We cover three recent years for which the fate of
submitted papers—about 600 papers to JSCS and 2500 to Entropy—is completely
determined. Instead of comparing the number distributions of these papers as a
function of time with respect to a uniform distribution, we analyze the
relevant probabilities, from which we derive the information entropy. It is
argued that such probabilities are indeed more relevant for authors than the
actual number of submissions. We tie this entropy analysis to the so called
diversity of the variable distributions. Furthermore, we emphasize the
correspondence between the entropy and the diversity with inequality measures,
like the Herfindahl-Hirschman index and the Theil index, itself being in the
class of entropy measures; the Gini coefficient which also measures the
diversity in ranking is calculated for further discussion. In this sample, the
seasonal aspects of the peer review process are outlined. It is found that the
use of such indices, non linear transformations of the data distributions,
allow us to distinguish features and evolutions of the peer review process as a function of time as well
as comparing the non-uniformity of distributions. Furthermore, t- and
z-statistical tests are applied in order to measure the significance (p-level)
of the findings, that is, whether papers are more likely to be accepted if they
are submitted during a few specific months or during a particular “season”; the
predictability strength depends on the journal.