Who 'owns' peer reviews? September 2017

Introduction

Two trends have recently come together within scholarly publication: open peer review and the desire to give recognition to the work peer reviewers do. At the convergence are organisations 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. Emergence of these services therefore prompts a number of questions as to how best to ensure the interests of the author, reviewer, editor, journal and other stakeholders are protected.

Scope/limitations

Journals will have to determine how this guidance fits into their own peer review guidelines. At a minimum, this document raises issues that editors should consider as they monitor and revise their workflow and internal processes to acknowledge the work of peer reviewers and consider entering into agreements with organisations that publish peer reviews. It also describes considerations that should be addressed in a journal’s written policies so as to minimize disagreement or uncertainty for individuals involved in the peer review process.

This is an extract. Refer to the PDF for the full document.

A recording of the day's discussion is also available: