Editorial decisions are made largely by senior editors and members of the board of reviewing editors, all of whom are active scientists working in fields ranging from human genetics and neuroscience to biophysics, epidemiology, and ecology.[8]
Business model
eLife is a non-profit organisation, but for long-term sustainability of the service, the journal asks for an article processing charge of US$3,000 for papers accepted for publication.[9] This charge was reduced to US$2,000 in 2022 after the adoption of a new model without accept or reject decisions.[10] Authors with insufficient funding are eligible for a fee waiver.
In a 2015 interview, Howard Hughes Medical Institute then-President Robert Tjian reflected on eLife and noted, "The other big thing is, we want to kill the journal impact factor. We tried to prevent people who do the impact factors from giving us one. They gave us one anyway a year earlier than they should have. Don't ask me what it is because I truly don't want to know and don't care."[17]
Most research articles published in the journal include an "eLife digest", a non-technical summary of the research findings designed for a general audience. Since December 2014, the journal has been sharing a selection of the digests on the blog publishing platform Medium.[18] eLife also publishes commentary articles called "Insights", which are also written in plainer terms than the research article, but focus more on the context of the research.
Reviewing process
Randy Schekman (the first editor-in-chief[19]) criticized Nature, Science and Cell as "luxury journals" in 2013, comparing their low acceptance levels and high impact factors with high-end "fashion designers" who deliberately inflated demand for their brand due to scarcity. During the peer review process, eLife encourages the reviewers to discuss a manuscript and agree on a common recommendation.[20] At the time, the acceptance rate of eLife was 15.4% (2015).[20]
In June 2018, eLife announced that it would try an innovative peer review model (for some 300 submissions) where the editorial decision to send a manuscript out for review is tantamount to offering publication to that manuscript, thereby putting the authors in control of publication after editorial screening has been passed.[21]
In December 2020, eLife announced a new "publish, then review" model of publishing; from July 2021 the journal will only review manuscripts already available as preprints.[22]
On October 20, 2022, eLife announced, "From next year, eLife is eliminating accept/reject decisions after peer review, instead focusing on public reviews and assessments of preprints."[23][24] All papers invited for peer-review will be published on the eLife website as Reviewed Preprints, accompanied by an eLife assessment and public reviews.[23]
The Ben Barres Spotlight Awards, established by eLife, embody a prestigious recognition that lauds exceptional scientific accomplishments within the fields of biology and medicine, particularly highlighting contributions from historically marginalized spheres. This distinguished award not only spotlights researchers operating within resource-limited domains but also extends its scope to encompass neurodivergent trailblazers, signifying a pioneering stride towards all-encompassing inclusivity.[25] Honoring the legacy of the visionary American neurobiologistBen Barres, a transgender scientist and impassioned advocate for scientific parity, these awards carry profound significance. Barres, a revered member of eLife's Board of Reviewing Editors, left an enduring imprint that continues to resonate.
The Ben Barres Spotlight Awards have been given each year since 2019. To qualify, applicants must be active researchers engaged in the life or biomedical sciences at a university or another non-commercial research institute. Scientists at all career stages are invited to partake in this esteemed acknowledgment. Since the establishment of the prize, award recipients have astutely harnessed the provided resources to transcend scientific barriers, seize novel research avenues, and catalyze transformative trajectories in their scientific ventures, thus etching an indelible mark on the scientific tapestry.
Controversial decisions
Following the Oct 20, 2022 announcement of the new reviewing model, some editors (including former editor-in-chief Randy Schekman) complained that the transition to the new model was too fast, and asked for compromise, threatening to resign if their concerns were not met.[26] Other editors expressed support for the new model, and suggested that the complaints came from a small minority.[27]
On October 23, 2023, eLife removed then editor-in-chief Michael Eisen for tweeting a story by The Onion with the headline: "Dying Gazans Criticized For Not Using Last Words To Condemn Hamas." Eisen said "The Onion speaks with more courage, insight and moral clarity than the leaders of every academic institution put together. I wish there were a @TheOnion university".[28] At least five of eLife's editors resigned and other scientists said they would stop participating in eLife events in solidarity with Eisen. A petition letter was organised to protest against Eisen’s firing. The petition, which was signed by over 2,000 scientists, academics and researchers, said eLife 's action is having a "chilling effect" on freedom of expression in academia.[6]
