Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers
نویسندگان
چکیده
Open peer review (OPR) is a cornerstone of the emergent Open Science agenda. Yet to date no large-scale survey of attitudes towards OPR amongst academic editors, authors, reviewers and publishers has been undertaken. This paper presents the findings of an online survey, conducted for the OpenAIRE2020 project during September and October 2016, that sought to bridge this information gap in order to aid the development of appropriate OPR approaches by providing evidence about attitudes towards and levels of experience with OPR. The results of this cross-disciplinary survey, which received 3,062 full responses, show the majority (60.3%) of respondents to be believe that OPR as a general concept should be mainstream scholarly practice (although attitudes to individual traits varied, and open identities peer review was not generally favoured). Respondents were also in favour of other areas of Open Science, like Open Access (88.2%) and Open Data (80.3%). Among respondents we observed high levels of experience with OPR, with three out of four (76.2%) reporting having taken part in an OPR process as author, reviewer or editor. There were also high levels of support for most of the traits of OPR, particularly open interaction, open reports and final-version commenting. Respondents were against opening reviewer identities to authors, however, with more than half believing it would make peer review worse. Overall satisfaction with the peer review system used by scholarly journals seems to strongly vary across disciplines. Taken together, these findings are very encouraging for OPR's prospects for moving mainstream but indicate that due care must be taken to avoid a "one-size fits all" solution and to tailor such systems to differing (especially disciplinary) contexts. OPR is an evolving phenomenon and hence future studies are to be encouraged, especially to further explore differences between disciplines and monitor the evolution of attitudes.
منابع مشابه
A prospective study on an innovative online forum for peer reviewing of surgical science
BACKGROUND Peer review is important to the scientific process. However, the present system has been criticised and accused of bias, lack of transparency, failure to detect significant breakthrough and error. At the British Journal of Surgery (BJS), after surveying authors' and reviewers' opinions on peer review, we piloted an open online forum with the aim of improving the peer review process. ...
متن کاملSame review quality in open versus blinded peer review in "Ugeskrift for Læger".
INTRODUCTION Research into the peer review process has previously been conducted in English-language journals. This study deals with a Danish general medical journal with a relatively small pool of both reviewers and readers. The aim of the study was to compare the quality of reviews produced by identifiable and anonymous reviewers, and further to characterize authors' and reviewers' attitudes ...
متن کاملPeer Reviewers’ Comments on Research Articles Submitted by Iranian Researchers
The invisible hands of peer reviewers play a determining role in the eventual fate of submissions to international English-medium journals. This study builds on the assumption that non-native researchers and prospective academic authors may find the whole strive for publication, and more specifically, the tough review process, less threatening if they are aware of journal reviewers’ expectation...
متن کاملEffect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers' recommendations: a randomised trial.
OBJECTIVES To examine the effect on peer review of asking reviewers to have their identity revealed to the authors of the paper. DESIGN Randomised trial. Consecutive eligible papers were sent to two reviewers who were randomised to have their identity revealed to the authors or to remain anonymous. Editors and authors were blind to the intervention. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The quality of the ...
متن کاملQuality, certification and peer review Perceptions and misperceptions: Attitudes to peer review
All the research projects discussed here were conducted in collaboration with either one of two independent research agencies based in the UK, GfkNOP or Illuminas. This discussion will draw upon three key studies. A qualitative study composed of focus groups and teledepth interviews completed in 2003–2004 which delved into the motivations and perceptions towards peer review specifically the opi...
متن کامل