Academic Publishing is Evolving…Peer Review @Pete BinfieldCo-Founder and PublisherPeerJ@ThePeerJhttps://peerj.com@p_binfie...
Academic Publishing is Evolving…(Some of) the Shortcomings of the Peer Review Process- The peer review process is usually ...
Academic Publishing is Evolving…PeerJ PrePrints- A preprint server for the biological and medical sciences- Preprint conte...
Academic Publishing is Evolving…The Reviewer’s Experience…- Pre-publication reviews are formally invited- Encouraged to pr...
Academic Publishing is Evolving…The Author’s Experience…- Can test drafts, gain informal feedback, and post revisions toPe...
Academic Publishing is Evolving…The Commenter’s Experience…- Comments are framed as ‘feedback’- Feedback is currently only...
https://peerj.com/articles/19/
https://peerj.com/articles/19/
https://peerj.com/macknik/
https://peerj.com/about/FAQ/academic-contribution/
https://peerj.com/articles/19/
https://peerj.com/reviews/48/
https://peerj.com/MathewWedel/
https://peerj.com/preprints/
https://peerj.com/preprints/8/
Academic Publishing is Evolving…(Some of) the Shortcomings of the Peer Review Process- The peer review process is usually ...
Academic Publishing is Evolving…(Some of) the Shortcomings of the Peer Review Process- The peer review process is usually ...
Academic Publishing is Evolving…Thank YouPete BinfieldCo-Founder and Publisher@p_binfieldpete@peerj.com@ThePeerJhttps://pe...
Peer Review at PeerJ - a Presentation to the ICML 2013 (International Conference on Machine Learning)
Peer Review at PeerJ - a Presentation to the ICML 2013 (International Conference on Machine Learning)
Peer Review at PeerJ - a Presentation to the ICML 2013 (International Conference on Machine Learning)
Peer Review at PeerJ - a Presentation to the ICML 2013 (International Conference on Machine Learning)
Peer Review at PeerJ - a Presentation to the ICML 2013 (International Conference on Machine Learning)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Peer Review at PeerJ - a Presentation to the ICML 2013 (International Conference on Machine Learning)

631 views

Published on

The Slides and Audio of the PeerJ presentation to the ICML (International Conference on Machine Learning) as part of their Workshop on Peer Reviewing and Publishing Models (June 20th, 2013), as organised by Andrew McCallum, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

See: https://sites.google.com/site/workshoponpeerreviewing/

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
631
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Peer Review at PeerJ - a Presentation to the ICML 2013 (International Conference on Machine Learning)

  1. 1. Academic Publishing is Evolving…Peer Review @Pete BinfieldCo-Founder and PublisherPeerJ@ThePeerJhttps://peerj.com@p_binfieldpete@peerj.com
  2. 2. Academic Publishing is Evolving…(Some of) the Shortcomings of the Peer Review Process- The peer review process is usually used to answer 2unrelated questions: validity and interest.- The decision of 2 anonymous reviewers determines the fate,and possible reception, of an article- The words and thoughts of reviewers are ‘lost’ to the ether- Authors are unable to demonstrate the work and thought thatwent into responding to reviewer comments- Reviewers get no (tangible) reward- Reviewers get no (attribution) credit- There is little incentive to submit a review in a timely manner- There is little incentive to take on a review in the 1stplace- Unrealistic expectations are placed on pre-publication peerreview to validate a publication and ‘catch all the errors’.
  3. 3. Academic Publishing is Evolving…PeerJ PrePrints- A preprint server for the biological and medical sciences- Preprint content is NOT peer reviewed- Includes versioning functionality- Engagement and commenting is linked to reputation metricsPeerJ- A broad based journal in the biological and medical sciences,judging submissions based only on technical and scientific validity- Fully peer reviewed, with rapid review process handled by a (very)large editorial board of 800, including 5 Nobel Laureates- Operates an optional ‘open peer review’ process- Engagement and commenting is linked to ‘reputation metrics’- Full suite of Article Level Metrics
  4. 4. Academic Publishing is Evolving…The Reviewer’s Experience…- Pre-publication reviews are formally invited- Encouraged to provide their name to the authors- Asked to comment only on scientific validity (in 3 categories of‘Basic Reporting’, ‘Experimental Design’ and ‘Validity of theFindings’)- Choose from 4 Recommendations (Accept, Minor Revisions, MajorRevisions, Reject)- User profiles are tied to Contribution credits- Gain a tangible reward for providing on time reviewsNote: Reviewers / authors / commenters all use a ‘single sign on’
  5. 5. Academic Publishing is Evolving…The Author’s Experience…- Can test drafts, gain informal feedback, and post revisions toPeerJ PrePrints- Do not have to contort or distort their article to demonstrateintangibles such as ‘novelty’, ‘broad interest’ or ‘high impact’- Have the potential to see the names of their reviewers- Are given the option to reproduce their peer review ‘audit trail’on the published article- Can recognize and reward insightful Feedback- Accrue ‘alt-metrics’ from day of publication- Are incentivized to participate in the peer review process
  6. 6. Academic Publishing is Evolving…The Commenter’s Experience…- Comments are framed as ‘feedback’- Feedback is currently only available on PeerJ PrePrints- No anonymous or pseudonymous commenting allowed- User profiles are tied to Contribution pointsThe Reader’s Experience…- Able to view the peer review process ‘in the raw’- Can access ‘alt-metrics’ to help them form their own opinionson any article- Can provide Feedback and Comments and gain recognitionfor doing so
  7. 7. https://peerj.com/articles/19/
  8. 8. https://peerj.com/articles/19/
  9. 9. https://peerj.com/macknik/
  10. 10. https://peerj.com/about/FAQ/academic-contribution/
  11. 11. https://peerj.com/articles/19/
  12. 12. https://peerj.com/reviews/48/
  13. 13. https://peerj.com/MathewWedel/
  14. 14. https://peerj.com/preprints/
  15. 15. https://peerj.com/preprints/8/
  16. 16. Academic Publishing is Evolving…(Some of) the Shortcomings of the Peer Review Process- The peer review process is usually used to answer 2unrelated questions: validity and interest.- The decision of 2 anonymous reviewers determines the fate,and possible reception, of an article- The words and thoughts of the reviewers are ‘lost’ to theether- Authors are unable to demonstrate the work and thought thatwent into responding to reviewer comments- Reviewers get no (tangible) reward- Reviewers get no (attribution) credit- There is little incentive to submit a review in a timely manner- There is little incentive to take on a review in the 1stplace- Unrealistic expectations are placed on pre-publication peerreview to validate a publication and ‘catch all the errors’.
  17. 17. Academic Publishing is Evolving…(Some of) the Shortcomings of the Peer Review Process- The peer review process is usually used to answer 2unrelated questions: validity and interest.- The decision of 2 anonymous reviewers determines the fate,and possible reception, of an article- The words and thoughts of the reviewers are ‘lost’ to theether- Authors are unable to demonstrate the work and thought thatwent into responding to reviewer comments- Reviewers get no (tangible) reward- Reviewers get no (attribution) credit- There is little incentive to submit a review in a timely manner- There is little incentive to take on a review in the 1stplace- Unrealistic expectations are placed on pre-publication peerreview to validate a publication and ‘catch all the errors’.Objective Review CriteriaObjective Review Criteria + Alt MetricsOpen Peer ReviewOpen Peer ReviewFree Membership for on-time reviewsContribution CreditFree Membership for on-time reviewsUn Peer-Reviewed PrePrints +Open Peer Review +Post Publication Feedback
  18. 18. Academic Publishing is Evolving…Thank YouPete BinfieldCo-Founder and Publisher@p_binfieldpete@peerj.com@ThePeerJhttps://peerj.com

×