How to get published in Nature

The criteria for publication of scientific papers in Nature are that they:

• report original scientific research (the main results and conclusions must not have been published or submitted elsewhere; see Guide to Authors)
• are of outstanding scientific importance
• are of interest to an interdisciplinary readership.

Papers published in Nature have an exceptionally wide impact, both among scientists and frequently among the general public.

Who decides which papers to publish?
Nature has space to publish only 10% or so of the 170 papers submitted each week, hence its selection criteria have to be extremely rigorous.

The judgement about which papers will interest a broad readership is made by Nature's editors, not its referees. One reason is because each referee sees only a tiny fraction of the papers submitted, whereas the editors, who see all the papers submitted, can have a broader perspective.

Nature does not employ an editorial board of senior scientists, nor is it affiliated to any particular scientific society or institution, thus avoiding the risk of decisions that are strongly coloured by the scientific or national prejudices of particular board members, as well as reducing the time taken to make decisions.

Because Nature's editors judge which papers to publish, decisions are quicker, more uniform across disciplines, and are independent.

What happens to a submitted paper?
Authors intending to submit papers to Nature should first refer to the extended guide to authors, most easily seen on the web site at Guide to Authors where it is also in PDF format, or available from Nature direct by request from nature@nature.com. Adherence to this guide will ensure that the level, length and format (particularly the layout of figures and tables) conforms with Nature's requirements and will reduce delays in the handling of the paper. The relevant number of papers in press or submitted elsewhere should be included with five copies of the Nature submission.

The first hurdle for a newly submitted paper is that the editorial staff consider it to be sufficiently interesting to be sent for peer-review. This judgement is made mainly by the editor most expert on the subject, but informal advice (by phone or email) is taken from regular scientific advisors and papers are discussed among several editorial colleagues to ensure consistency. It is helpful to Nature's editors if the paper is accompanied by a cover letter that states briefly why the author thinks the paper belongs in Nature rather than in one of the excellent specialist journals in the field. The initial criteria for a paper to be sent for peer-review are that the results seem novel, arresting (unexpected or surprising), and that the work seems broadly significant outside the field. The initial judgement is not a reflection on the scientific validity of the work described, or on its importance to people in the same field.

Once the editors have decided that a paper is in principle sufficiently interesting to be sent to referees, the choice of referees is usually made by the editor who knows most about the topic in question, and who will be handling other papers in the same field. Most papers are sent to two or three referees, but some are sent to more or, occasionally, just to one. Among the considerations that arise in choosing specific referees are

• whether the referee is independent of the authors and their institutions
• whether the referee can evaluate the technical aspects of the paper fully and fairly
• whether any related papers are under consideration
• whether the potential referee has assessed other papers recently
• whether the referee is available to assess the paper within the requested time.

Referees' reports
The ideal referee's report indicates

• who will be interested in the new results and why
• any technical failings that need to be addressed before the authors' case is established.

Although Nature's editors themselves judge whether a paper is likely to interest readers outside its own immediate field, referees often give helpful advice, for example if the work described is not as significant as the editors thought or has perhaps undersold its own significance. Although Nature's editors regard it as essential that any technical failings noted by referees are addressed, they are not so strictly bound by referees' opinions as to whether a particular paper belongs in Nature.

Nature's editors may also ask referees of submitted Articles whether, in the referee's view, the paper could be condensed to a Letter without loss of essential information.

Competitors
Some of the referees to whom an editor might consider sending a paper may be engaged in competing work that could influence their opinion. To avoid such conflicts of interest, Nature requires potential referees to disclose any conflicts or commercial interest before undertaking to review a paper, and requires referees not to copy papers or to circulate them to unnamed colleagues.

Nature welcomes authors' suggestions for suitable independent referees (with their contact details), but editors are free not to use these referees. Nature honours requests that a paper not be sent to one or two (but no more) competing groups for review, although it is Nature's experience that competitors often enthusiastically recommend papers.

Speed
Nature makes decisions about submitted papers as rapidly as possible. Authors are usually informed within a week if the paper is not being considered (authors are not currently informed that their paper has been sent out for review, but they receive an acknowledgement with a reference number which should be cited in all future communication about that paper).

Nature makes every effort to provide rapid delivery of referees' reports. Most referees honour their prior agreement with Nature to report on a paper within seven days or other agreed time limit, and most referees send reports by email. Referees are chased by phone, fax or email if they have not delivered their report within the agreed time.

Exceptionally important papers
Of course, every author believes that his or her paper is important, particularly in highly competitive fields, and entitled to the quickest possible handling. Nature strives to provide this service for all submitted papers.

In exceptional cases, if the work described in a submitted paper seems to the editors to be so important that it would be considered a privilege to be asked to review it, and if the editors know of competing similar work in press elsewhere, Nature can offer a fast-track procedure in which a paper is refereed within 48 hours and is typeset before receipt of the referees' reports in the expectation that major alterations will not be required in the light of the reports. On rare occasions such as these, it is possible to publish a paper within 2 weeks of submission.

Decisions
Once all the referees' reports on a paper have been received, the editor handling the paper writes a summary of the paper's contents and the referees' opinions, a recommendation, and a draft letter to the authors for internal discussion with other editors, including the biology or physical sciences editor. Thus Nature ensures that the criteria used by all editors are uniform, and that the paper has received expert assessment.

Once an editorial consensus has been reached, a letter of decision is sent to the authors, generally by fax or email, together with the referees' reports (sent anonymously, unless the referees have explicitly directed otherwise).

What the decision letter means
Letters from Nature editors will offer the authors of a paper one of the following options:

• The paper is accepted for publication without any further changes required from the authors. In practice, this course of action is extremely rare.

• The paper is accepted for publication in principle once the authors have made some revisions in response to the referees' comments. Under these circumstances, revised papers are not usually sent back to the referees for a second opinion, but are accepted for publication once the editors have checked that the referees' suggestions have been implemented.

• A final decision on publication is deferred, pending the authors' response to the referees' comments. Under these circumstances, further experiments are usually required to address some or all of the referees' concerns, and revised papers are sent back to some or all of the referees for a second opinion. Revised papers should be accompanied by a point-by-point response to all the comments made by all the referees.

• The paper is rejected because the referees have raised considerable technical objections and/or the authors' claim has not been adequately established. Under these circumstances, the letter will state explicitly whether or not a resubmitted version would be considered. If the editor has invited the authors to resubmit, authors should ensure that all the referees' comments have been satisfactorily addressed (not just some of them) and should accompany the resubmitted version with a point-by-point response to the referees' comments. Resubmitted papers are sent back to the reviewers only if it seems to the editor handling the paper that the authors have made a serious attempt to address all the referees' criticisms, rather than revising it minimally. (Papers that have been revised only minimally will be returned to the authors without being sent back to the referees.)

• The paper is rejected with no offer to reconsider a resubmitted version. Under these circumstances, authors are strongly advised not to resubmit a revised version as it is likely that it will be returned to them without further review. If the authors feel that they have a strong scientific case for reconsideration (if the referees have missed the point of the paper, for example) they can appeal the decision in writing (see below). But in view of Nature's extreme space constraints and the large number of active papers under consideration at any one time, editors cannot assign a high priority to consideration of such appeals.

Note that very few papers are published without significant revisions to the original submission. Some of the papers of which Nature is most proud of publishing are those which were originally weak but intriguing, and have become really striking only by virtue of extensive attention from the referees and editors.

Editors' letters also contain detailed guidance about the paper's format and style (see below).

Revising papers
In replying to the referees' comments, authors are advised to use language that would not cause offence when their paper is shown again to the referees, and to bear in mind that if a point was not clear to the referees and/or editors, it is unlikely that it would be clear to the nonspecialist reader.

Authors should refer to the guide to authors once again when revising their paper and figures for publication, and ensure that the correct number of copies are included.

Appeals
If Nature declines to publish a paper and does not suggest resubmission, authors are strongly advised to submit their paper for publication elsewhere. If an author wishes to appeal against Nature's decision, the appeal must be made in writing, not by telephone, and should be confined to the scientific case for publication. Nature's editors are unable to assign high priority to consideration of appeals.

One common complaint by authors of rejected papers is that Nature has chosen inappropriate referees. These authors ask for the referees' advice to be disregarded, and often suggest the names of "real experts" in the field. Surprisingly often, one or more of the individuals named by the authors is already a referee of the paper.

In any event, Nature prefers to stick with the views of the original referees of a particular paper rather than to call in new referees to arbitrate, unless there is some specific reason why a referee can be shown to be biased that was previously unclear to the editors. If Nature's editors agree to reconsider a particular paper, the other referee(s) will have the chance to see and comment on the report of the referee who is the subject of the complaint.

If an author remains unsatisfied with Nature's answer to an appeal, he or she can write again to the biological or physical sciences editor or, if the author is still unsatisfied, to the Editor. In all these cases, it is likely that some time will elapse before Nature can respond.

Formats and lengths of papers
Once Nature's editors have agreed on scientific grounds to accept a paper in principle for publication, they examine the paper's format in detail.

Space in Nature is extremely limited, and so format requirements must be strictly observed, as described in detail in the guide to authors.

The most frequently problematic guideline is the overall length limit of 21/2 pages of Nature for a Letter. This translates to about 1,500 words of text for a Letter with four display items (tables or figures) in the physical sciences, and about 1,000 words plus four display items for biology Letters, which tend to have larger figures as well as methods sections. Authors can trade display items for additional text using the measurements provided in the guide to authors to ensure that the final length of the paper is within the 2.5 page limit.

Nature's editors will sometimes set a length limit of greater or less than 2.5 pages for a particular Letter (or greater or less than 5 pages for a particular Article). These decisions are made after careful consideration and discussion of individual papers. When Nature asks for significant reductions in length, the editor will make specific suggestions for the required shortening. Many authors are pleasantly surprised to find how easy it can be to condense text by focusing on the really essential points. The result of this exercise is a paper that is easier to read and understand, and hence one that will be more widely cited and influential.

If an author has not provided a revised paper at or around the length requested by the editor, it may be returned to the author for further shortening, with resultant further delay. Revised papers that are only a small amount over length may sometimes be reduced by the editors. But authors are best placed to prepare the paper at the requested length to ensure that there are no unintentional distortions to the meaning introduced during shortening.

Subediting of accepted papers
Nature's subeditors are happy to advise authors about the format of their papers. Their role is to

• edit the language for maximum clarity and precision for those in other disciplines. Special care is given to papers whose authors' native language is not English
• ensure that the paper is at the length specified by the manuscript editor
• ensure that the terminology and notation conform to Nature's house style
• ensure that the figures and tables are clear and will fit in the space available.

Preparation of the paper
In preparing the final version of the paper, authors should refer again to the guide to authors. Points worth emphasizing are:

• The introductory paragraph of Letters. This is a single, fully referenced paragraph of no more than 180 words (ideally shorter) which should both introduce the work and provide a non-technical summary. The composition of these paragraphs is relatively difficult; Nature's editors and subeditors are willing to help in rewriting the authors' material if requested.

• The discussion. The space constraints in Nature are so severe that papers do not have an extended discussion of the kind found in many other journals. In Letters, the discussion generally consists of a single, brief paragraph.

• Reference lists should contain the titles of books and articles cited.

• Methods sections of not more than 800 words long are placed at the end of the text. Figure legends do not contain methods unless each legend is shorter than 100 words.