Academics’ attitudes towards peer review in scholarly journals and the effect of role and discipline

This research contributes to the knowledge on academics’ attitudes towards peer review, through an international and inter-disciplinary survey of academics, which profiles academics’ views on the value of peer review, its benefits and the prevalence of unethical practices. Generally, academics regarded peer review as beneficial to improving their article and felt that peer review contributed significantly to the effectiveness of scholarly communication. Academics agreed that peer review could improve the readability and quality of the published paper, as well as check for accuracy, appropriate methodology, novelty and relevance to the journal. There are significant differences in the views of respondents on the basis of role, with those involved as reviewers and editors being less positive about peer review than authors. In addition, there is evidence of some disciplinary differences in views on the benefits of peer review.

[1]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  How scholars implement trust in their reading, citing and publishing activities: Geographical differences , 2014 .

[2]  Suzie Allard,et al.  Trust and Authority in Scholarly Communications in the Light of the Digital Transition: setting the scene for a major study , 2014, Learn. Publ..

[3]  Suzie Allard,et al.  Peer review: still king in the digital age , 2015, Learn. Publ..

[4]  Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez,et al.  Bias and effort in peer review , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[5]  Monica Zaharie,et al.  Peer review motivation frames: A qualitative approach , 2016 .

[6]  Jennifer E. Rowley,et al.  Academics' behaviors and attitudes towards open access publishing in scholarly journals , 2017, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[7]  Lisa Bero,et al.  Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Louise Hall,et al.  Peer review in a changing world: An international study measuring the attitudes of researchers , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[9]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  Bias in peer review , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[10]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Trustworthiness and authority of scholarly information in a digital age: Results of an international questionnaire , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[11]  L. Lambe Academics’ behaviors and attitudes towards open access publishing in scholarly journals , 2017 .

[12]  Kellogg S. Booth,et al.  Understanding and supporting anonymity policies in peer review , 2017, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  Stacy M Carter,et al.  Journal peer review in context: A qualitative study of the social and subjective dimensions of manuscript review in biomedical publishing. , 2011, Social science & medicine.

[14]  Willem-Jan van den Heuvel,et al.  Imperfect referees: Reducing the impact of multiple biases in peer review , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..