Our research on the effect of open #peerreview on referee behaviour at journals has been published today in ! Congrats to and thanks to for the support. Read it here
The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals - Nature Communications
Publishing the contents of peer reviews does not compromise referees’ willingness to review, recommendations, or turn-around times **if reviewers can remain anonymous**. Signed open reviews tend to be more positive.
Excellent paper out today reporting results from a 5-journal trial to #publishPeerReview, by . Here are some highlights (thread)
"We did not find any significant negative effects [of open peer review] on referees’ willingness to review, their recommendations, or turn-around time." Pic: more senior academics agreed less to do open reviews than ECRs The effect of open peer review:
"The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in 5 scholarly journals": found younger & non-academic scholars more willing to accept to review and provided more positive and objective recommendations. #OpenAccess at
The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals
"These findings suggest that open peer review does not compromise the process, at least when referees are able to protect their anonymity, conclude et al.
This paper says that publishing the peer review comments doesn't significantly compromise referees’ willingness to review, recommendations, or turn-around times as long as the anonymity is preserved -> from > 18,000 #peerreviews reports from 5 journals
Only 8.1% of referees agreed to reveal their identity in the published report. Male referees tended to write more constructive reports. Younger and non-academic scholars provided more positive and objective recommendations.
Great paper on the effect of publishing peer reviews on referee reports, with my colleague Bahar Mehmani, among others! #openscience #openpeerreview
The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals
Tracker is a boon for innovation in peer review Thank you ⁦⁩ for creating this well-thought registry and the invite to register our study ⁩ ⁦⁩ ⁦
#OpenPeerReview #PeerReview On Wiley's OPR findings for 1 jnl: 83% of authors opted in for OPR when submitting their article and only 19% of reviewers choose to disclose their names. (similar to our findings:)
The effect of publishing #peerreview reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals. Younger and non-academic #scholars were more willing to accept to review and provided more positive and objective recommendations.
ARTICLE: "The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals" Nature Comms Spoiler: Open referee reports didn't prevent people from accepting reviewing & male referees tended to write more constructive reports
"The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in 5 scholarly journals": found only 8% of referees agreed to reveal their identity in the published report. #OpenAccess at
"The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in 5 scholarly journals": found male referees tended to write more constructive reports during the pilot. #OpenAccess at
The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals | Nature Communications
"The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in 5 scholarly journals": found that publishing reports didn't significantly compromise referees’ willingness to review, recommendations, or turn-around times. #OpenAccess at .
The effects of open peer review in an Elsevier pilot study. Linked by . (Open access article)