Do conspicuous manuscripts experience shorter time in the duration of peer review?

TL;DR

This study investigates how the attractiveness of manuscripts, measured by altmetric attention scores, influences the duration of peer review, revealing that more attention-grabbing papers tend to be reviewed faster.

Contribution

It introduces a novel perspective by linking manuscript attractiveness, via attention economy theory, to peer review duration, based on analysis of BMJ review data.

Findings

Significant negative relationship between peer review duration and altmetric attention scores.

Attractiveness of manuscripts can shorten peer review times.

Bridges the gap between peer review processes and altmetric measures.

Abstract

A question often asked by authors is how long would it take for the peer review process. Peer review duration has been concerned much by authors and attracted much attention in academia these years. Existing research on this field focuses primarily on a single quantitative dimension. Seldom studies considered that peer review duration is closely related to the attractiveness of manuscripts. This study aims to fill this research gap employing attention economy theory. By analyzing the peer review history from the British Medical Journal (BMJ), we find that a significant negative relationship exists between the peer review duration and altmetric attention score (AAs). Overall, our study contributes to understanding peer review behavior from a new perspective and bridging the divide between peer reviews and altmetrics.