* Transparency: eLife is a pioneer in transparent peer review. Reviewers' identities are often revealed to the authors (and sometimes vice versa, depending on reviewer and author consent), and reviewers' reports (sometimes heavily redacted for confidentiality) are often shared with the authors (and sometimes publicly). This fosters a more open and collaborative review process, improving the quality of the paper and enhancing the understanding of the decision-making process.
* Emphasis on the importance of the work: eLife prioritizes the significance and impact of the research rather than solely focusing on technical perfection. They aim to publish work that is genuinely groundbreaking, innovative, or addresses important questions within a field. This means that technically sound but less impactful studies may be rejected, even if they meet the technical standards of other journals.
* Reviewer expertise and selection: eLife invests heavily in selecting reviewers with appropriate expertise and a demonstrated commitment to rigorous and fair assessment. The editorial team works hard to match reviewers with manuscripts that fit their specific knowledge base.
* Collaborative and iterative review process: eLife's review often involves several rounds of feedback, discussion among editors and reviewers, and opportunities for authors to revise their manuscripts in response to critiques. This iterative process encourages significant improvements in the quality and clarity of the research.
* Post-publication discussion: eLife provides avenues for post-publication discussion and commentary on published articles, fostering continued engagement with the research and allowing for further scrutiny and analysis by the broader scientific community.
* Data sharing and reproducibility: eLife strongly encourages data sharing and the inclusion of sufficient details to allow other researchers to reproduce the findings. They often provide resources and support to authors to facilitate data sharing.
In short, eLife differentiates itself through its commitment to transparency, the evaluation of a paper's impact and significance, the collaborative nature of its review process, and its support for data sharing and reproducibility. This combination sets it apart from many traditional journals that often prioritize technical correctness over overall impact and transparency.