The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society is thought to be the first journal to formalize the peer review process under the editorship of Henry Oldenburg (1618- 1677).ĭespite many criticisms about the integrity of peer review, the majority of the research community still believes peer review is the best form of scientific evaluation. Furthermore, a 2015 survey by the Publishing Research Consortium, saw 82 percent of researchers agreeing that “without peer review there is no control in scientific communication.” This opinion was endorsed by the outcome of a survey Elsevier and Sense About Science conducted in 2009 and has since been further confirmed by other publisher and scholarly organization surveys.
#Istudio publisher tutorial free
To learn more about peer review, visit Elsevier’s free e-learning platform Researcher Academy. Peer review comes in different flavours: you must therefore check which variant is employed by the journal on which you are working so you’re aware of the respective rules.
Each system has its own advantages and disadvantages. Often one type of review will be preferred by a subject community but there is an increasing call towards more transparency around the peer review process. In case of questions regarding the peer review model employed by the journal for which you have been invited to review, consult the journal’s homepage or contact the editorial office directly.
In this type of review, the names of the reviewers are hidden from the author. Points to consider regarding single anonymizedreview include: This is the traditional method of reviewing and is the most common type by far. Reviewer anonymity allows for impartial decisions – the reviewers should not be influenced by the authors.Authors may be concerned that reviewers in their field could delay publication, giving the reviewers a chance to publish first.Reviewers may use their anonymity as justification for being unnecessarily critical or harsh when commenting on the authors’ work.īoth the reviewer and the author are anonymous in this model.Some advantages of this model are listed below. Author anonymity limits reviewer bias, for example based on an author's gender, country of origin, academic status or previous publication history.
Articles written by prestigious or renowned authors are considered on the basis of the content of their papers, rather than their reputation.īut bear in mind that despite the above, reviewers can often identify the author through their writing style, subject matter or self-citation – it is exceedingly difficult to guarantee total author anonymity.
0 kommentar(er)
