You are here

Peer review processes

All peer review processes must be transparently described and well managed. Journals should provide training for editors and reviewers and have policies on diverse aspects of peer review, especially with respect to adoption of appropriate models of review and processes for handling conflicts of interest, appeals and disputes that may arise in peer review

Our core practices

Core practices are the policies and practices journals and publishers need, to reach the highest standards in publication ethics. We include cases with advice, guidance for day-to-day practice, education modules and events on topical issues, to support journals and publishers fulfil their policies.

About this resource

Diversity and inclusivity in peer review. Podcast with Professor Andy Hor, Hong Kong University

A discussion with Charon Pierson, COPE Secretary and Andy Hor, Vice President of Research at Hong Kong University. An institutional perspective on training early career researchers within a culture of diversity and inclusivity.

 

Full page history

  • 11 October 2019

    Sticky at top of list

  • 20 September 2018

    First iteration of page.

News

Letter from COPE: June 2020

At this time we pay our respects to the memory of George Floyd, whose brutal killing has amplified issues of systemic racism in our society. We wish to voice our horror and outrage at the egregious violence, injustice, and marginalisation faced by people of colour in the US and throughout the world. We support all who stand against prejudice and discrimination of any kind.

News

In the news: June 2020

Each month COPE Council members gather and share publication ethics news. This month the news includes articles on diversity, open access, COVID-19, and more.

News

Editing, reviewing and writing during COVID-19

We bring together support and guidance on issues that have come about during this crisis. The collection includes articles on how authors, editors and reviewers are handling their work during this period and guidelines developed in response to the changing environment and workflow.

News

Editing of reviewer comments: survey

Following our Forum discussion on this topic in March 2020, we would like to hear your views on an editor's ability to alter the contents of a submitted peer review.

Views from editors and publishers will form the basis of a COPE discussion document on the topic. Please fill in the short survey. 

Deadline to complete survey: Friday 27 March 2020

https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/H5PRXGY

News

In the news: March Digest

Open Science

The United States Office of Science & Technology Policy recently posted a notice of request for information titled “Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code Resulting from Federally Funded Research.” Comments from stakeholders on approaches for broader access to federally funded research are due by March 16.

News

Case discussion: Editing peer review comments

Peer reviewers provide their own intellectual property to the important work of reporting research. Sometimes, though, their comments may not align with a journal’s style or requirements, or can stray into the realm of what some call “hostile reviews”. Also, sometimes reviewers miss the mark and either do not understand the paper or parts of it, or include content that is factually incorrect. What is an editor to do in their effort to balance the interests of the authors, reviewers, journals

News

Letter from COPE Vice-Chair: February 2020

This is my first opportunity to open the Digest, so welcome everyone. In this issue, we are releasing the final version of the COPE Strategy for 2020-2023. This document is the end product of months of hard work by your volunteers (COPE Council and Trustee Board) to develop a focus for the next three years. Our four strategic priorities over this period can be summarised as:

Pages