We’re kicking off Peer Review Week 2016 with a look at what our journals have to say about the topic. Read the articles below for free all throughout Peer Review Week until September 26th!
- Why training and specialization is needed for peer review: a case study of peer review for randomized controlled trials [Open Access] Jigisha Patel – BMC Medicine: Specialization, training and ongoing appraisal and revalidation in peer review, coupled with a quality assurance symbol for the lay person, could address some of the current limitations of peer review for randomized controlled trials.
- Promoting F.A.I.T.H. in Peer Review: Five Core Attributes of Effective Peer Review Leigh Turner- Journal of Academic Ethics: This paper considers what authors, editors, reviewers, and readers ought to expect from the peer review process. Five core elements of peer review are identified
- Is expert peer review obsolete? A model suggests that post-publication reader review may exceed the accuracy of traditional peer review Daniel M. Herron- Surgical Endoscopy: The peer review process is the gold standard by which academic manuscripts are vetted for publication. However, some investigators have raised concerns regarding its unopposed supremacy, including lack of expediency, susceptibility to editorial bias and statistical limitation due to the small number of reviewers used. In this study, a computer model was created to compare the traditional peer-review process to that of post-publication reader review.
- Peer review under review: room for improvement?
- Peer reviewers learn from giving comments Research on peer reviewing has revealed that comments received from peer reviewers are helpful when it comes to making revisions in an individual’s writing, but the role of providing comments to peer writers has been little explored despite the potential value of such research. In this study, how student reviewers learn by reviewing peer drafts in the context of reciprocal peer reviewing is explored.
- The reviewer in the mirror: examining gendered and ethnicized notions of reciprocity in peer review
- Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors
Featured Image: AJ Cann/Flickr, CC BY-SA