Background: "Open peer review" (OPR), despite being a major pillar of Open Science, has neither a standardized definition nor an agreed schema of its features and implementations. The literature reflects this, with numerous overlapping and contradictory definitions. While for some the term refers to peer review where the identities of both author and reviewer are disclosed to each other, for ot...

This paper describes an original method for evaluating peer review in online systems by calculating the helpfulness of an individual reviewer's response. We focus on the development of specific and machine scoreable indicators for quality in online peer review.

In educational peer-review activities, one challenge is to tell which peer reviews are credible. Reputation systems are one approach. However, they work best in a scenario where (i) most of the peer reviewers can do a decent job, or (ii) reviewers tend to do peer-reviews in fixed styles─e.g., negative reviewers are negative on all artifacts they review; accurate reviewers grade all work accurat...

Design of peer-review support systems is shaped by the policies that define and govern the process of peer review. An important component of these are policies that deal with anonymity: the rules that govern the concealment and transparency of information related to identities of the various stakeholders (authors, reviewers, editors, and others) involved in the peer-review process. Anonymity po...

conclusions the project succeeded in using focus group data from academics to inform software development while at the same time retaining the benefits of broader philosophical dimensions of critical thinking. materials and methods critiique is flexible, authorable software that guides students step-by-step through critical appraisal of research papers. the spelling of critiique was deliberate,...

Currently peer review is thought to be slow, expensive, profligate of academic time, highly subjective, prone to bias, easily abused, poor at detecting gross defects, and almost useless for detecting fraud. One cannot predict the future but at present there do not seem to be serious alternatives to peer review. Peer review has been structurally static since the nineteenth century mainly through...