In support of #PeerRevWk20 theme #TrustInPeerReview, we asked the Chefs how trust in peer review could be improved. See what the said and add your thoughts!
Rick Anderson interviews Kim Eggleton of IOP about the publisher’s recently announced move to 100% double-blind peer review.
Revisiting a 2018 post — Overlooking the need for paid Editorial Office staff hobbles many attempts to reform peer review.
Revisiting a 2015 post to ask whether we are any closer to offering researchers credit for non-research activities?
Recognizing the many ways that researchers (and others) contribute to science and scholarship has historically been challenging but we now have options, including CRediT and ORCID.
Journal submission fees would reduce the continuously growing editorial and peer review burdens while allowing for better levels of rigor and oversight. Roy Kaufman makes a case for their adoption.
ResearchGate’s Joseph DeBruin looks at the balance between speed and uncertainty in scholarly communication, and how technology can facilitate better information travel.
Major scholarly publishers have made substantial investments in preprints in recent years, integrating preprint deposit into manuscript submission workflows.
In the coming months and years, we will have an opportunity to study the affects of the COVID pandemic on scholarly publishing. Angela Cochran explores questions related to the participation of women in scholarship, funding changes, resource issues, and the future of research enterprises.
Five months to go till the sixth annual Peer Review Week, a global celebration of the critical role peer review plays in scholarly communications. This year’s theme is trust — learn more in this post by Alice Meadows
Open peer review hasn’t caught on in the humanities, but it has been part of ongoing experiments in humanities publishing. As the American Historical Review tries open review, what lessons can we take from previous experiments?
Alison Mudditt looks at the recently released TOP Factor from the Center for Open Science, and the bigger picture of shifting the nature of research assessment.
Giving authors a choice between submission fees and APCs has numerous benefits
We’re delighted to end this year’s Peer Review Week celebrations by sharing some great community resources that you can use all year round!
From the Peer Review Congress, what’s changed and what’s about to change? John Sack conducts an interview with the Executive Director and Co-Director of the International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication.