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?
Continuing our celebration of Peer Review Week 2019, today Alice Meadows interviews Tracey Brown, OBE, Director of Sense about Science, which has been involved in Peer Review Week from the start.
A major factor in determining quality in the peer review process are the reviewers. Without peers providing high-quality reviews, the value-add of the peer review process declines. We started this conversation about what makes a quality peer review within our larger community via Twitter , and came up with a few qualities of good peer reviewers.
And we’re off! Alice Meadows and Karin Wulf kick off the fifth annual Peer Review Week with their thoughts on defining quality in peer review principles and practices.
Quality means different things to different people. How do you think different stakeholders would define quality in peer review?
The fifth annual Peer Review Week will take place from September 16-20, 2019. In this post, co-founder Alice Meadows reflects on its history and achievements, and looks forward to this year’s celebrations.
In this interview Robert Harington asks Melinda Baldwin to talk about her recent article in Isis, entitled “Scientific Autonomy, Public Accountability, and the Rise of “Peer Review” in the Cold War United States”, and to provide some more personal views on peer review topics of the moment.
A Baker’s Dozen TSK posts that address issues central to diversity, the theme of Peer Review Week 2018. We hope these will get your reading, thinking and commenting!
We continue our Peer Review Week celebrations with a roundup of articles about bias, diversity, and inclusion in peer review, by Alice Meadows, including eight lessons we can all learn from them
The Publons Global State of Peer Review Report reveals significant patterns in reviews and reviewing, with implications for global science.
We continue our Peer Review Week celebrations with a guest post by Donald Samulack (Editage) and Jason Roberts (Origin Editorial), who call for a collective approach to developing definitive guidance on transparency in peer review for journals, authors, and reviewers.
To kick off Peer Review Week 2018, Alice Meadows and Karin Wulf — guest editors for this week — share their vision of the environmental requirements for a diverse and inclusive peer review ecosystem.
To round out Peer Review Week 2017, here’s a brief summary of some key takeaways from this year’s Peer Review Congress, held every four years.
Continuing our Peer Review Week celebrations, we asked representatives from three very different organizations – the American Historical Association, BioMed Central and The Royal Society – to share their thoughts on the evolution of peer review for journals from its beginnings through the present and into the future.
The topic of this year’s Peer Review Week is transparency in review – we are joining in the celebrations with a series of posts on this topic and on peer review more generally, beginning with a look at the critical importance of peer review as a mechanism of discernment and scrutiny in a world of “alternative facts”.