Rewarding the quantity of peer review could harm biomedical research

@article{AlKhatib2019RewardingTQ,
  title={Rewarding the quantity of peer review could harm biomedical research},
  author={Aceil Al-Khatib and Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva},
  journal={Biochemia Medica},
  year={2019},
  volume={29}
}
Voluntary peer review is generally provided by researchers as a duty or service to their disciplines. They commit their expertise, knowledge and time freely without expecting rewards or compensation. Peer review can be perceived as a reciprocal mission that aims to safeguard the quality of publications by helping authors improve their manuscripts. While voluntary peer review adds value to research, rewarding the quantity or the volume of peer review is likely to lure academics into providing… 

Figures from this paper

Are negative reviews, predatory reviewers or failed peer review rewarded at Publons?

Dear International Orthopaedics Editors, At Publons, which is owned by ClarivateTM Analytics, peer reviewers gain credit for having conducted peer review, i.e. a peer reviewer’s “quality” is measured

Overburdening of peer reviewers. A multi-disciplinary and multi-stakeholder perspective on causes, effects and potential policy implications

TLDR
In order to alleviate reviewing burden, a holistic approach is required that addresses both the increased demand for and the insufficient supply of reviewing resources.

Peer-reviewing in Surgical Journals: Revolutionize or Perish?

TLDR
The potential causes of the peer-review crisis are identified, the incentives and drawbacks of being a reviewer are outlined, the currently established common practices of rewarding reviewers and the existing and potential solutions to the problem are discussed along with its current flaws.

A Synthesis of the Formats for Correcting Erroneous and Fraudulent Academic Literature, and Associated Challenges

  • J. A. Teixeira da Silva
  • Computer Science
    Journal for general philosophy of science = Zeitschrift fur allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie
  • 2022
TLDR
The risks, benefits and limitations of these forms of correcting the academic literature are discussed, including manuscript versioning, amendments, partial retractions and retract and replace.

German Medical Data Sciences in Studies in Health Technology and Informatics - Reflections on the Fifth Volume

Since 2017, the German Society for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology e.V. (GMDS) offers the submission of full papers to the annual meetings, optional in Studies in Health Technologies

The Role of Publons in the Context of Open Peer Review

Publons was a peer reviewer rewards platform that aimed to recognize the contribution that academics made during peer review to a journal. For about 10 years of its existence, Publons became the most

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 29 REFERENCES

Peer Review – Essential for Article and Journal Scientific Assessment and Validity

TLDR
Through years-long experience of the editor, of several journals, I think that a search for an appropriate peer-reviewer is the most complex part in the scope of responsibilities of theeditor.

Rewarding Peer Reviewers: Maintaining the Integrity of Science Communication

TLDR
This article overviews currently available options for rewarding peer reviewers and suggests a strategy of combined rewards and credits for the reviewers seems a workable solution.

Free editors and peers: squeezing the lemon dry

Abstract In this opinion piece, some of the practices of academic publication in the biomedical field related to the rewarding, or the lack thereof, of peer reviewers are described and discussed. The

Will Publons Popularize the Scientific Peer-Review Process?

Lately, I have been having trouble sleeping. There is something on my mind, something that I have been putting off for weeks and is long overdue. It is not what you might think. I have not missed a

Problems with Traditional Science Publishing and Finding a Wider Niche for Post-Publication Peer Review

TLDR
This article explores what is broadly being said about post-publication peer review (PPPR) in the literature, so as to establish awareness and a possible first-tier prototype for the sciences for which such a system is undeveloped or weak.

The Principles of Fair Allocation of Peer-Review: How Much Should a Researcher be Expected to Contribute?

TLDR
Two simple principles are proposed, which could fairly allocate the contribution of individual researchers to the peer-review process, and could help journal editors secure reviewers in a timely manner.

The ClarivateTM Analytics acquisition of Publons – an evolution or commodification of peer review?

Without peer reviewers, the entire scholarly publishing system as we currently know it would collapse. However, as it currently stands, publishing is an extremely exploitative system, relative to

The scandal of poor medical research

TLDR
The authors need less research, better research, and research done for the right reasons, and researchers who use the wrong techniques, use the right techniques wrongly, misinterpret their results, report their results selectively, cite the literature selectively, and draw unjustified conclusions.

Perverse incentives and perverse publishing practices

Over the past few years, publishing has becoming increasingly complex with new journals and business models, new technology, new models of peer review and new ways to collaborate and disseminate

The Rise of Predatory Publishing: How To Avoid Being Scammed

TLDR
The explosive increase in predatory OA journals is not only a risk to inexperienced authors, but also threatens to undermine the OA model and the legitimate communication of research.