Publishing: Journals could share peer-review data

@article{Squazzoni2017PublishingJC,
  title={Publishing: Journals could share peer-review data},
  author={F. Squazzoni and F. Grimaldo and A. Maru{\vs}i{\'c}},
  journal={Nature},
  year={2017},
  volume={546},
  pages={352-352}
}

Topics from this paper

A Disciplinary View of Changes in Publications' Reference Lists After Peer Review
TLDR
It is suggested that manuscripts in the natural and medical sciences undergo more extensive reframing of the literature used to situate and interpret the results of studies than the social and agricultural sciences, which are further embedded in the existing literature through peer review. Expand
Gender bias in academia: A lifetime problem that needs solutions
TLDR
It is argued that gender bias is not a single problem but manifests as a collection of distinct issues that impact researchers' lives and proposes concrete solutions that can be adopted by individuals, academic institutions, and society. Expand
Measuring the Developmental Function of Peer Review: A Multi-Dimensional, Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of Peer Review Reports from 740 Academic Journals
Reviewers do not only help to screen manuscripts for publication in academic journals; they also serve to increase the rigor and value of manuscripts by constructive feedback. However, measuring thisExpand
Open science saves lives: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic
TLDR
Concerns about the violation of some of the Open Science principles and its potential impact on the quality of research output are expressed and evidence of the misuses of these principles at different stages of the scientific process is provided. Expand
Peer review and gender bias: A study on 145 scholarly journals
TLDR
Findings suggest that peer review and editorial processes do not penalize manuscripts by women, and increasing gender diversity in editorial teams and referee pools could help journals inform potential authors about their attention to these factors and so stimulate participation by women. Expand
Large-scale language analysis of peer review reports
TLDR
It was found that reviewer recommendation had the biggest impact on the linguistic characteristics of reports, and that area of research, type of peer review and reviewer gender had little or no impact. Expand
Managing the Growth of Peer Review at the Royal Society Journals, 1865-1965
This article examines the evolution of peer review and the modern editorial processes of scholarly journals by analyzing a novel data set derived from the Royal Society’s archives and coveringExpand
Only Second-Class Tickets for Women in the COVID-19 Race. A Study on Manuscript Submissions and Reviews in 2329 Elsevier Journals
During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the submission rate to scholarly journals increased abnormally (e.g., more than 90% in health & medicine Elsevier journals). Given that mostExpand
Open Science Saves Lives: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic
TLDR
Concerns about the violation of some of the Open Science principles and its potential impact on the quality of research output are expressed and evidence of the misuses of these principles at different stages of the scientific process is provided. Expand
Open up: a survey on open and non-anonymized peer reviewing
TLDR
The main quantitative result is that respondents are more positive to open and non-anonymized reviewing for alt.chi than for other parts of the CHI conference, which concurs with a number of recent studies that suggest a divergence between support for a more open review process and its practical implementation. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
...