Ask The Chefs: How Would You Ensure Diversity In Peer Review?
In advance of Peer Review week, what are your ideas for ensuring diversity in peer review? Come see what the Chefs had to say and add your ideas to the conversation!
#PeerReviewWeek18 Is Coming!
Peer Review Week 2018 takes place September 10-15. Find out more about the theme, how you can get involved, and what we will be doing to celebrate here on The Scholarly Kitchen in this post by Alice Meadows
Peer Review – Authors and Reviewers – our “North Star”
Robert Harington suggests that publishers need to do more for researchers to help authors, and to help reviewers understand their role as a reviewer and be recognized for their work. We need to tackle implicit bias in peer review. We need to focus on our “North Star”
Everything* You Always Wanted To Know About Blockchain (But Were Afraid To Ask)
Love it or loathe, blockchain is making the headlines everywhere! But what exactly is it? Does it really have a role to play in scholarly communications? If so, what and how? In this interview, Joris van Rossum (Digital Science) and Martijn Roelandse (Springer Nature) answer these questions and more.
Peer Review Fails to Prevent Publication of Paper with Unsupported Claims About Peer Review
A flawed article claiming that manuscripts don’t change much between being preprints and published articles somehow makes it through peer review unchanged.
Not Every Publisher Can Support A Cascade Journal
Solving the transfer problem has created a widespread perception that rejecting a manuscript–especially after considerable time and resources have been devoted to its review–is downright wasteful. If it’s publishable, why not publish it?
Gender Bias in Peer Review: An Interview with Brooks Hanson and Jory Lerback
Earlier this year, an American Geophysical Union analysis of peer review in its journals revealed evidence of gender bias, with women being less likely to be invited to review than men despite being more likely to be the first author of an accepted paper. In this interview, Brooks Hanson (Senior Vice President, Publications) and former Data Analyst, Jory Lerback describe the original study and the AGU’s efforts to address this bias.
Difficulty In Finding Reviewers Taints Editorial Decisions
Journal editors are more likely to reject papers when they experience trouble recruiting reviewers, reports a new study.
Turning a Critical Eye on Reference Lists
Citations and the metrics around their use are an important part of evaluation and promotion of science and scientists and yet, little attention is paid to them in the peer review process. In this post, Angela Cochran makes a call to critically review reference lists and develop standards around what should and should not be included.
Portable Peer Review RIP
After several pivots and failures, it may be time to finally say goodbye to portable peer review.
MECA – A New Manuscript Exchange initiative
A new initiative has been launched to define best practices for simplifying transfer of submitted manuscripts across publishers and systems.
What Does Transparent Peer Review Mean and Why is it Important?
The theme of this year’s Peer Review Week is transparency in peer review. Learn what the four speakers at the September 12 PRW panel session on this topic think this means and why it’s important.
Study Reports Open Peer Review Attracts Fewer Reviews, Quality Suffers
Open online review has the potential to attract many more eyes to a new piece of research than conventional peer review. In reality, it may do far worse in attracting the eyes you want.
The Stars Are Aligning for Preprints
An overview of recent events and the current state of preprints in the scholarly communications landscape.
What Constitutes Peer Review of Data? A Survey of Peer Review Guidelines
What constitutes peer review of a data set?