On the review process: Editors speak

Authors

  • Colin O'Dowd,

  • Steven Pawson,

  • Alan Robock,

  • Darin Toohey


Abstract

We have read with interest the letters to Eos that have discussed the issue of peer review. Although this letter is written largely with the members of the Atmospheric Sciences Section in mind, it may also add some perspective to the general discussion of anonymous reviews.

Due to the volume of papers submitted to the Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres (∼1200 every year), we have appointed a number of associate editors (currently about 40). These AEs serve in a variety of ways, including recommending reviewers, consulting on papers in their areas of expertise, and assisting when there are potential conflicts of interest. The ultimate responsibility for decisions on all papers, however, rests with the editors alone. Apparently, this procedure is different from that taken by other journals, as noted by Robert J. Geller and John A. Goff in their letters printed in the 23 September 2003 issue of Eos.

Ancillary