Who “owns” peer reviews?
Two trends have recently come together within scholarly publication; open review, and the desire to give credit to reviewers (see also ). At the convergence are organizations like Publons and Academic Karma who wish to openly acknowledge the work of peer-reviewers by recording, not only the amount, but also, in some circumstances, the content of individuals’ peer-review activity.
Academics may view services like this as a way to regain control over their reviews and so may be keen to sign-up and provide their data. Journals, on the other hand, often conduct confidential review processes and wish to restrict the sharing of comments exchanged during peer-review.
Emergence of these services therefore prompts a number of concerns and questions as to how best ensure author, editor, reviewer and journal interests are protected.
- Does it violate confidential/blind peer-review to reveal reviewer comments even after publication?
- What can journals do to make sure reviewer comments remain confidential?
- How can reviewers ensure they are able to share and get credit for their work?
- Can service providers work with journal editors, publishers and reviewers to help facilitate openness and transparency in peer review?