A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review
MetadataShow full item record
Peer review of research articles is a core part of our scholarly communication system. In spite of its importance, the status and purpose of peer review is often contested. What is its role in our modern digital research and communications infrastructure? Does it perform to the high standards with which it is generally regarded? Studies of peer review have shown that it is prone to bias and abuse in numerous dimensions, frequently unreliable, and can fail to detect even fraudulent research. With the advent of web technologies, we are now witnessing a phase of innovation and experimentation in our approaches to peer review. These developments prompted us to examine emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer review. We examine the functionality of a range of social Web platforms, and compare these with the traits underlying a viable peer review system: quality control, quantified performance metrics as engagement incentives, and certification and reputation. Ideally, any new systems will demonstrate that they out-perform and reduce the biases of existing models as much as possible. We conclude that there is considerable scope for new peer review initiatives to be developed, each with their own potential issues and advantages. We also propose a novel hybrid platform model that could, at least partially, resolve many of the socio-technical issues associated with peer review, and potentially disrupt the entire scholarly communication system. Success for any such development relies on reaching a critical threshold of research community engagement with both the process and the platform, and therefore cannot be achieved without a significant change of incentives in research environments.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Tennant, J.; Dugan, J.; Graziotin, D.; Jacques, D.; Waldner, F.; Mietchen, D.; Elkhatib, Y.; B Collister, L.; Pikas, C.; Crick, T.; Masuzzo, P.; Caravaggi, A.; Berg, D.; Niemeyer, K.; Ross-Hellauer, T.; Mannheimer, S.; Rigling, L.; Katz, D.; Greshake Tzovaras, B.; Pacheco-Mendoza, J.; Fatima, N.; Poblet, M.; Isaakidis, M.; Irawan, D.; Renaut, S.; Madan, C.; Matthias, L.; Nørgaard Kjær, J.; O'Donnell, D.; Neylon, Cameron; Kearns, S.; Selvaraju, M.; Colomb, J. (2017)Peer review of research articles is a core part of our scholarly communication system. In spite of its importance, the status and purpose of peer review is often contested. What is its role in our modern digital research ...
Peer review in an undergraduate biology curriculum : effects on students' scientific reasoning, writing and attitudesTimmerman, Briana Eileen (2008)Scientific reasoning and writing skills are ubiquitous processes in science and therefore common goals of science curricula, particularly in higher education. Providing the individualized feedback necessary for the ...
Quality Assessment and Certification in Open Scholarly Publishing and Inspiration for MOOC CredentialingRen, Xiang (2016)This chapter looks at the changing landscape of quality assessment and certification/credentialing in open knowledge systems by a comparative study between open publishing and open education. Despite the disruptive changes ...