![]() For instance, sociologist Misha Teplitskiy at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor and his colleagues were confidentially supplied with reviewers’ identities for 7,982 neuroscience manuscripts submitted to PLoS ONE, and created co-publishing networks of reviewers, authors and editors. Tantalizing insights are possible when researchers can access journal data about peer review. ![]() Here we describe a pilot project to encourage broad, systematic study of peer review and what we hope this can accomplish. ![]() Yet greater transparency and study could determine which models and practices of peer review best promote research integrity and reliability 4. It often depends on personal connections with journals, and is generally limited to such a small number of titles that generalizations are hard to make. Access to data about the review process is hard won. The topic is under-studied partly because it is difficult to research. Nor is there a way to compare the reactions of authors and reviewers at different journals or in different disciplines. #REVIEWS OF UNLOX HOW TO#There is a lack of systematic research on how journals manage the process (such as selecting, instructing and rewarding reviewers, managing conflicting reviews, or publishing reviewers’ reports) on how to define the quality and utility of individual reviews and on how to assess peer review (such as who participates, how and why). The most rigorous work is generally restricted to one or a few journals per study, often in the same field. Current investigations are fragmented, with few connections and limited knowledge-sharing, as manifested by how sparsely these researchers cite each other’s papers 3. ![]() Nature will publish peer review reports as a trialĭespite decades of calls for study, research on peer review is scarce 2. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |