Two trends have recently come together within scholarly publication; open review, and the desire to give credit to reviewers. 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.
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.
Questions
- 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?
Download the PDF for the full discussion
- Login to your account or register
to post comments
About this resource
Full page history
-
6 October 2021
Reassigned to Forum discussion topic filter