Recommendations for accelerating open preprint peer review to improve the culture
of science
-
Published:2024-02-29
Issue:2
Volume:22
Page:e3002502
-
ISSN:1545-7885
-
Container-title:PLOS Biology
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:PLoS Biol
Author:
Avissar-Whiting Michele, Belliard Frédérique, Bertozzi Stefano M., Brand Amy, Brown Katherine, Clément-Stoneham Géraldine, Dawson Stephanie, Dey Gautam, Ecer Daniel, Edmunds Scott C., Farley Ashley, Fischer Tara D., Franko Maryrose, Fraser James S., Funk Kathryn, Ganier Clarisse, Harrison Melissa, Hatch Anna, Hazlett Haley, Hindle Samantha, Hook Daniel W., Hurst Phil, Kamoun Sophien, Kiley Robert, Lacy Michael M., LaFlamme Marcel, Lawrence Rebecca, Lemberger Thomas, Leptin Maria, Lumb Elliott, MacCallum Catriona J., Marcum Christopher Steven, Marinello Gabriele, Mendonça Alex, Monaco Sara, Neves Kleber, Pattinson Damian, Polka Jessica K.ORCID, Puebla IratxeORCID, Rittman Martyn, Royle Stephen J., Saderi Daniela, Sever Richard, Shearer Kathleen, Spiro John E., Stern Bodo, Taraborelli Dario, Vale Ron, Vasquez Claudia G., Waltman Ludo, Watt Fiona M., Weinberg Zara Y., Williams Mark
Abstract
Peer review is an important part of the scientific process, but traditional peer
review at journals is coming under increased scrutiny for its inefficiency and lack of
transparency. As preprints become more widely used and accepted, they raise the
possibility of rethinking the peer-review process. Preprints are enabling new forms of
peer review that have the potential to be more thorough, inclusive, and collegial than
traditional journal peer review, and to thus fundamentally shift the culture of peer
review toward constructive collaboration. In this Consensus View, we make a call to
action to stakeholders in the community to accelerate the growing momentum of preprint
sharing and provide recommendations to empower researchers to provide open and
constructive peer review for preprints.
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Reference41 articles.
1. Peer review: Troubled from the start;A. Csiszar;Nature,2016 2. THE ROYAL SOCIETY AND THE PREHISTORY OF PEER REVIEW, 1665–1965;N Moxham;Hist J,2018 3. Sense about Science, Elsevier. Quality, Trust and Peer Review.
2019 [cited 2023 Mar 28]. Available from:
https://www.elsevier.com/research-intelligence/resource-library/trust-in-research-report. 4. Peer review in a changing world: An international study measuring the attitudes of researchers;A Mulligan;J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol,2013 5. Stop the peer-review treadmill. I want to get off;A. Dance;Nature,2023
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|