JGR-Space Physics receives about a thousand manuscripts a year and publishes roughly seven hundred. That is, most but not all of the submissions make through the editorial-review filter. As the new Editor-in-Chief, I have no goals to systematically increase or decrease this ratio, but in the process of augmenting the review process (i.e., asking referees to consistently provide a thorough review of all aspects of manuscript, commenting on both good and bad aspects of the work), I think that this ratio might change.
I cannot predict which direction it will go. Referees are used to pointing out the negative aspects of a manuscript, and asking them to also mention the positive qualities could lead to more favorable decisions. On the other hand, the focus on a robust review might bring out more negative issues about manuscripts. In addition, I don’t know what affect this extra scrutiny will have on authors. I hope that we will all step up to the task of writing papers that have a significant impact on the field, but that is sometimes difficult to judge at the reviewing stage.
What do you think? Should there be an active push to increase the number of manuscripts sent to JGR-Space Physics? Should the number of papers published in the journal be intentionally increased or decreased? Should there be a conscious effort to increase or decrease the acceptance ratio?