Ending Human-Dependent Peer Review
Human-dependent peer review is inequitable, suffers from injustice, and is potentially unsustainable. Here’s why we should replace it (eventually) with AI-based peer review.
Guest Post — Striking a Balance: Humans and Machines in the Future of Peer Review and Publishing
How do we strike a balance between humans and AI to improve peer review? We’ve interviewed a few publishing experts who specialize in human and AI ethical, equitable, and sustainable publishing solutions to share their thoughts on the future of peer review.
How Does Mandated Code-sharing Change Peer Review? An Interview with PLOS Computational Biology
In today’s Peer Review Week guest post, Joe Pold of PLOS interviews the senior editorial team of PLOS Computational Biology about their experience of mandating code sharing for the journal, and its impact on peer review
Ask the Chefs: What is the Single Most Pressing Issue for the Future of Peer Review?
What is the single most pressing issue for the future of peer review in scholarly publishing? In advance of Peer Review Week, we asked the Chefs.
AI Beyond the Publishing Workflow
What uses for artificial intelligence (AI) might we expect outside of the publication workflow? Some answers to this question can be found through the lenses of sustainability, justice, and resilience.
Guest Post — Ghost-writing Peer Reviews Should Be a Thing of the Past
Policies that formally give peer reviewers the option to officially invite a colleague to collaborate with them improve integrity, transparency, and offers a chance to give fair credit where it is due.
Guest Post — Peer Review Week 2023 to Focus on Peer Review and the Future of Publishing
Peer Review Week is an annual global event exploring and celebrating the essential role of peer review. This year’s Peer Review Week theme is “Peer Review and the Future of Publishing.”
Guest Post: Start at the Beginning – The Need for ‘Research Practice’ Training
Danny Kingsley suggests that research integrity begins with the training researchers receive at university. Achieving Open Research and increasing reproducibility requires systematic research training that focuses specifically on research practice.
Guest Post — Enabling Trustable, Transparent, and Efficient Submission and Review in an Era of Digital Transformation
Digital transformation in submission and peer review offers improvements for publications and a better experience for researchers and journal staff.
Editors can’t spot talent. I’ve heard this joke before. It isn’t funny
Editors at The BMJ are lousy at predicting the citation performance of research papers. Or are they?
Guest Post — Integrity and Trust in Peer Reviewed Literature: Will Journals Be Alone in Doing the Heavy Lifting?
We round out Peer Review Week with a guest post by Erin Landis, Meghan McDevitt, and Jason Roberts of Origin Editorial reporting on the 2022 Peer Review Congress.
Peer Review and Humanities Online: An Interview with Daryle Williams about the Journal of Slavery and Data Preservation
Key insights on how peer review functions for a new journal, handling data on individual lives of people enslaved in the historical slave trade, that serves both academic and public audiences.
Ask the Chefs: Is Research Integrity Possible without Peer Review?
Continuing the run-up to this year’s Peer Review Week (September 19-23) today you’ll hear the Chefs’ answers to the question: Is research integrity possible without peer review?
The Peer Review Workbench: An Interview with Bahar Mehmani
Learn about Elsevier’s recently launched Peer Review Workbench – a new tool for researchers conducting meta research – in this interview with Bahar Mehmani
Revisiting — Should You “Revise and Resubmit”? Probably
Today Angela Cochran revisits a post from 2016 on “revise and resubmit” decisions and what it means for authors and editors. Do new peer review models or cascading programs change the use of “revise and resubmit”?