Peer Review

This tag is associated with 149 posts

Guest Post: Kent Anderson UPDATED — 96 Things Publishers Do (2016 Edition)

Kent Anderson returns to update his essential list of just what it is that publishers do. Continue reading

Revisiting: The Problem(s) With Credit for Peer Review

Do we need more metrics, or can some questions be answered more easily? Continue reading

PNAS: Tighter Editorial Policy Improves NAS Papers

After years of tightening its submissions policy, papers contributed by NAS members start resembling direct submissions. Continue reading

Is Reviewer Fatigue a Real Thing?

Editors are quick to assume that reviewer fatigue is slowing them down; but one journal found that excessive invitations to review was not cited as a major reason why reviewers declined invitations. Continue reading

Survey: What Do Authors Expect From Peer Review?

Stop thinking of peer review as a concept and start thinking of it as a toolbox. Continue reading

Do Academy Members Publish Better Papers?

When journals provide academy members a VIP submission track, do their papers perform any better? Continue reading

What is an Academic Journal?

We spend much time these days wondering when the academic journal as we know it will cease to exist. Robert Harington discusses the role of the journal in light of a fascinating new venture in the field of mathematics – the overlay journal Discrete Analysis. Continue reading

Welcome to Peer Review Week!

Welcome to the first – but hopefully not the last – Peer Review Week: an opportunity to celebrate the fundamental role played by peer review in scholarly communications, and the many diverse efforts to improve and support it. Continue reading

Revisiting: The Editor — A Vital Role We Barely Talk About Anymore

Revisiting Kent Anderson’s 2014 post on the importance of editors–how much of what we see as a failure of “peer review” is really a failure of editorial oversight? Continue reading

Peer Review Week – A Celebration!

Peer review is fundamental to scholarly communications – not just journal articles, but conference papers, grants, promotion and tenure, and more. Four organizations plan to honor it through a Peer Review Week later this month – we hope you’ll join the celebrations! Continue reading

Extreme Bias: How Rejection Clouds The Eyes of Researchers

The publication experience of authors may come down to a single factor: was the manuscript accepted? Continue reading

Scholarly Kitchen Podcast: Ivan Oransky and Retraction Watch

In this episode, Retraction Watch co-founder Ivan Oransky talks with podcast host Michael Clarke about the causes, trends, and problems with retractions of scientific research papers. Continue reading

Scholarly Kitchen Podcast: “101 Innovations” and Scientific Workflow

Jeroen Bosman and Bianca Kramer, librarians at Utrecht University, talk with podcast host Stewart Wills about their 101 Innovations project. Continue reading

The Problem(s) With Credit for Peer Review

Offering researchers credit for performing peer review seems, on the surface, like a good idea. But implementing such a scheme raises some problematic questions. Continue reading

Challenges, Connections, Conversations, and Collaboration – Lessons from the May 2015 ORCID-CASRAI Conference

The recent ORCID-CASRAI conference in Barcelona brought together over 150 researchers, research administrators, funders, publishers, vendors, and others working in scholarly communications to discuss research evaluation, with a particular focus on social science and humanities – resulting in some interesting conversations and observations Continue reading

Sexism in Peer Review

When sexist comments make it into a technical review of a research article, journal editors and publishers are wise to take a moment and think about processes for finding, responding to, and eradicating this behavior. Continue reading

Thumbs Down for the Freemium Model? Researchers Reject Nature’s Fast Track Peer Review Experiment

Nature conducts an experiment in paid fast track peer review, and the research community responds with concerns over creating an unfair tiered system for publication. Continue reading

Version Control; or, What does it Mean to “Publish?”

The Oxford English Dictionary’s overarching definition of the transitive verb “publish” is “to make public.” An early use, dating to 1382 is “to prepare and issue copies of (a book, newspaper, piece of music, etc.).” This is probably how most publishers think of the term: public distribution of a text. In usage dating from 1573, … Continue reading

Peer Review — Recognition Wanted!

Despite recent criticisms, peer review remains central to scholarly communication – but identifying and maintaining a steady stream of trained and knowledgeable peer reviewers is increasingly challenging. With researchers under more pressure than ever to publish or perish, some journal editors would like to see more support and recognition for peer review from their institutions and funders. Continue reading

Buried in the Matryoshka — Unpacking the “Value Add” of Peer Review

Publishers often slap labels on activities that are complex, expensive, and high-value. Worse, we often accept people calling these activities “value-add” when they are core functions of how scientific information shared. Continue reading

The Scholarly Kitchen on Twitter

Find Posts by Category

Find Posts by Date

February 2016
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
2829  
SSP_LOGO
The mission of the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) is "[t]o advance scholarly publishing and communication, and the professional development of its members through education, collaboration, and networking." SSP established The Scholarly Kitchen blog in February 2008 to keep SSP members and interested parties aware of new developments in publishing.
......................................
The Scholarly Kitchen is a moderated and independent blog. Opinions on The Scholarly Kitchen are those of the authors. They are not necessarily those held by the Society for Scholarly Publishing nor by their respective employers.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 20,317 other followers