Open Peer Review
Peer Review
(traditional)
Open Peer Review
-
Revealing/blinding the names of reviewers/authors
-
Put more kinds of work under review (grant app, code, etc)
-
Reveal more stages of the work (pre-pub, pub, post-pub)
-
Extend the comment/discussion online via annotation
-
Publish sooner, perform peer review as ongoing process
- Getting credit for reviewing papers (Publons)
- and more...
History
Began with biomedical journals (BMJ) to deter conflicts of interest in the pharmaceutical industry
Open Access model development encouraged trial of open peer review models
"Open Science" encourages the sharing of more research outputs, which can all be placed under review and reused as an ongoing activity
Challenges
Major journals do not yet facilitate open processes (or only trial them)
Not all reviewers want to be named (review the reviewer?)
Not all authors want to have the review process shown (hide your weaknesses)
Niche fields do not have many SMEs who can review articles
Examples
BMC publishes names of reviewers
PeerJ allows authors/reviewers to reveal names
Overlay journals add annotation/commenting to OA articles
F1000 publishes pre-print immediately, review next