Haseeb Irfanullah looks at recognition in peer review, what’s offered now and what’s on the horizon. How does this affect the process?
To round off Peer Review Week 2021, Phill Jones and Alice Meadows share work under way to map out a PID-optimized workflow for peer review – and invite your feedback!
In a collaborative open peer review process, the editor’s role changes as much as the reviewer’s role. Editors share some insights about how this works at JOSS.
Continuing our series of posts for Peer Review Week 2021, guest authors Matt Giampoala, Randy Townsend, and Paige Wooden of AGU share their efforts to improve reviewer and editorial board diversity.
Open peer review has been growing steadily but its implementations take many different forms. Alison Mudditt and Véronique Kiermer take a deep dive into the question of whether reviewers should be openly identified.
Identity in/ and Peer Review. Previewing some of the themes from this week’s posts for Peer Review Week.
The Steering Committee of Peer Review Week answers the question “What does identity in peer review mean to you?”
In anticipation of #PeerReviewWeek21 we asked the Chefs about the role of identity in peer review. See what they said and share your views!
Revisiting a 2017 post that asks, “When does a preprint become a publication?”
Byron Russell, John Sack, Alison McGonagle-O’Connell, and Tony Alves look at the way publishers are adapting their traditional submission workflows to better integrate the use of preprints.
Simultaneously submitting an article to multiple journals is considered an ethical violation. But the growth of preprints means that many articles are undergoing simultaneous yet parallel peer review processes. Will duplicate peer review become the norm?
Revisiting Tim Vines’ 2017 post — Open data continues to gain ground, but is there a revenue stream that would help journals recover the costs of gathering, reviewing and publishing data?
A pilot series of community peer review events from four organizations (AfricArXiv, Eider Africa, TCC Africa, and PREreview) have been developed to enable equitable practices of research evaluation and review.
When do new approaches to research communication become an end unto themselves? How much more work can we pile on researchers? Is more information always better than less?
In today’s post, Angela Cochran is revisiting the topic of balancing reviewer needs and author expectations. Recent data from one flagship journal showed significant overlap in the reviewer pool within top journals in the field, emphasizing the need to double-down on efforts to diversify.