Advertisement

About EMBO Reports

 

EMBO reports publishes scientific research in all areas of molecular biology, as well as expert reviews from leading researchers and editorial content that offers insight into the broader issues affecting science and society. These diverse article types provide a distinct perspective.


Aims & Scope

EMBO Reports publishes short-format papers that communicate a single major finding, offering novel physiological/functional insight of wide interest that is robustly documented by independent lines of evidence. Papers can be in any area of molecular biology, including:

  • Membranes & Transport
  • Cell & Tissue Architecture
  • Signal Transduction
  • Chromatin & Transcription
  • RNA
  • Proteins
  • Cell Cycle
  • Genome Stability & Dynamics
  • Development
  • Differentiation & Death
  • Cellular Metabolism
  • Neuroscience
  • Immunology
  • Plant Biology
  • Microbiology & Pathogens
  • Molecular Biology of Disease
  • Genomic & Computational Biology
  • Structural Biology
  • Molecular Evolution
  • Molecular Ecology
  • Biotechnology

 

Article Types

Scientific Reports

Short-format, original research papers that report ground-breaking advances in any aspect of molecular biology. Scientific reports should communicate a single major finding, offering physiological/functional insight of wide interest that is robustly documented by independent lines of evidence.

Reviews

Concise and accessible overviews of cutting edge science, written and peer-reviewed by leading scientists.

Science & Society

Essays and articles on the impact and application of science: uses and abuses of science, communication and education, policy and practice.

Editorial

Howy Jacobs shares his thoughts.

Opinion

Leading scientists and others offer commentary and opinion on topics on and beyond molecular biology.

Hot off the Press

EMBO reports papers highlighted and contextualized.

Correspondence

News, highlights and insight from the latest meetings.

 

Transparent Editorial Process

 

EMBO reports has a fair and transparent process to rapidly publish important science.

Transparent Review

  • No confidential referee remarks
  • Published anonymous referee reports and editorial correspondence
  • Editors respect requests to exclude specific referees
  • Editors justify editorial decisions in detail and specify what is required for a revision

Flexible Formatting

  • No journal-specific formatting required at submission; manuscripts are assessed for science, not for style

Scooping Protection

  • Similar findings that are published by others during review or revision are not a criterion for rejection
  • In exceptional circumstances, editors may consider manuscripts that have just been scooped

Cross-Referee Commenting

  • Referees are invited to comment on each other's reports before the editor makes a decision, ensuring a balanced review process

Single Round

  • Papers rarely undergo more than one major round of revision
  • Referees are asked to focus on essential revisions and to consider the feasibility of experiments they suggest
  • Revisions are invited only if they are possible in a realistic time frame
  • Editors ensure that referees do not raise new non-essential points upon revision
  • More than 95% of invited revisions are published at EMBO reports

Fast Process

  • Editorial decisions are returned within a week and referee comments in less than a month
  • After acceptance, we can publish fully edited papers within 10 days

Approachable Editors

  • Authors can discuss manuscripts with editors at any stage in the process, including during revision and following rejection. Editors may invite author feedback on referee reports before reaching a decision

Informed Evaluation

  • Scientific editors undertake a comprehensive evaluation of each manuscript. Editorial board members advise rapidly on manuscripts

Source Data

  • Authors are encouraged to publish the unprocessed source data underlying graphs, gels and micrographs alongside the figures to promote data transparency and reuse
  • Supplementary information is restricted to essential data supporting key claims in the main paper. Structured datasets, models and detailed protocols are also permitted

Manuscript Transfers

  • Authors can elect to transfer manuscripts with referee reports between the EMBO publications. Editors prioritize transfers and base decisions on the available information, ensuring exceptional manuscripts can be published without delay

Review Process Files

EMBO reports invites authors to have a Peer Review Process File included alongside their published papers. Authors can decline to participate in this initiative.

A Peer Review Process File documents the timeline and all the correspondence relevant to the processing of the manuscript at the Journal. It contains the referee reports from each round of review, alongside the author responses and the editorial decision letters, and, where appropriate, additional correspondence between the editors and the authors. Importantly, referees remain anonymous.

The time line includes the actual dates of each submission, resubmission and decision.

De-emphasis of confidential comments

As part of our transparency initiative, we now forego 'confidential referee comments'. We actually rarely encounter comments that are at odds with the main referee report, although referees sometimes repeat their views in more straight language. Nevertheless, the existence of this additional layer of commenting begs the question 'What went on behind the scenes?'. Confidential comments are clearly appropriate in the rare cases where there are concerns about ethical standards, data integrity, biosecurity or conflicts of an academic or commercial nature, which should be communicated directly to the editor.

Cross-peer review

In order to optimize the peer review process, we now actively encourage referees to comment on each other's reports. For the majority of manuscripts, we send the reports to all referees a day before the decision is made encouraging feedback. It is essential to emphasize that we do not expect every referee to comment on every other report—this will be exception, not the norm. The lack of a post-review comment will in no way lessen our appreciation of the primary report filed. We envisage two major scenarios where post-review feedback is important: if a referee wants to note that one of the other referees has raised erroneous or non-essential issues, or indeed if a bias is perceived, or if a referee has overlooked an essential point raised by another referee and wishes to reinforce that point. Importantly, we will not always go with the last word— the additional feedback will help us think in a more integrated way about the decision, and, if need be, engage in further consultation. Note that this additional step does not delay the editorial process.

Co-review

We subscribe to referee confidentiality rules. On the other hand, we are aware of the relatively common practice of handing a review onto someone else in the laboratory. If carried out correctly, this can in fact be an important part of training, but it should be reserved for experienced postdoctoral researchers. Thus, EMBO reports allows co-refereeing with one other senior member of a referee's laboratory as part of the mentoring process only if the primary referee has independently evaluated the manuscript and agrees with the report filed. For co-review, conflict of interest and confidentiality rules apply to both referees. In order to provide accountability and appropriate credit, we request that the name of the co-referee be documented to the editors. If an invited referee does not have the time to review, another member of the laboratory or institute can be recommended to the editors.

Bibliometrics

Impact Factor (2013): 7.8 (Thomson Reuters)
5-year Impact Factor (2013): 7.6 (Thomson Reuters)
Immediacy Index (2013): 2.0 (Thomson Reuters)
SJR (2013): 4.4 (JournalM3trics)
SNIP (2013): 1.1 (JournalM3trics)
h5 (2009-2013): 60 (Google Scholar)
Eigenfactor (2011): 0.046 (eigenfactor.org)
Article Influence (2011): 3.74 (eigenfactor.org)

Open Access

Authors of research articles can also opt to pay an article processing charge of $3,900 (+VAT where applicable) for their accepted articles to be open access online immediately upon publication. By paying this charge authors are also permitted to post the final, published PDF of their article on a website, institutional repository or other free public server, immediately on publication.

Please note that EMBO OPEN charges will have to be levied in addition to the page charges, in order to cover some of the costs associated with the production process for a paper.