Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Open Peer Review

Ad

Open Peer Review
Emily Ford
Urban & Public Affairs Librarian
Portland State University
forder@pdx.edu

Ad

WHAT IS PEER REVIEW?

Ad

WHAT IS THE GOAL OF PEER
REVIEW?

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Ad

Loading in …3
×

Check these out next

1 of 23 Ad
1 of 23 Ad

More Related Content

Open Peer Review

  1. 1. Open Peer Review Emily Ford Urban & Public Affairs Librarian Portland State University forder@pdx.edu
  2. 2. WHAT IS PEER REVIEW?
  3. 3. WHAT IS THE GOAL OF PEER REVIEW?
  4. 4. “…Depending on its environment, peer reviewing can differ as to its purposes, participants, process, and product. In qualitative research, peer review may also be used to improve a research proposal or project's trustworthiness.” -Chenail, R. (2008). Peer Review. In Lisa M. Given (Ed.), The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. (pp. 605-607). “…the goal of peer review is to make good and defensible judgments rather than to have high reliability…” -Mark,M. & Chua, P. (2005). Peer Review. In S. Mathison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Evaluation. (p. 301).
  5. 5. Peer Review Process
  6. 6. Taweed Manzoor flic.kr/p/4w7zdc CC-BY Open Review
  7. 7. Rob Cottingham flic.kr/p/8FbWsQ CC-BY-NC
  8. 8. Before During After Before & During Pics in Public Domain: 1.usa.gov/1LkVhjS Tony Webster flic.kr/p/vK44SY CC-BY
  9. 9. Before F1000Research In the Library with the Lead Pipe
  10. 10. During BioMed Central PeerJ Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics
  11. 11. After PLoS One BMJ
  12. 12. WHO DOES THE REVIEWING?
  13. 13. Author identified reviewers Editors Author-supplied reviewers Editor-supplied reviewers Expert PEERJ Community Members Academic EditorsScientific Community Referees Editors Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics Reviewers Editors Reviewers Editors
  14. 14. Daniel Lee flic.kr/p/nrwgpV CC-BY-ND
  15. 15. Before After Before Pics in Public Domain: 1.usa.gov/1LkVhjS Tony Webster flic.kr/p/vK44SY CC-BY
  16. 16. Submission Review Publication Open Peer Review Process OR
  17. 17. Gideon Burton flic.kr/p/5P2D9w CC-BY-SA
  18. 18. FOR YOU, WHAT ARE THE PROS?
  19. 19. FOR YOU, WHAT ARE THE CONS?
  20. 20. Open Peer Review Pro • Reviewer accountability • Better reviews • Enhances discourse for readers • Provides for developmental writing & research relationship • Timeline to publish/reviews • Transparency in editorial decision-making • Reviewers’ acknowledgment for work • Discourse among reviewers Con • Protects against implicit bias • Recruiting reviewers • Adoption Barriers • Hard to manage (?)
  21. 21. WHAT WOULD IT TAKE FOR YOU TO PARTICIPATE?
  22. 22. Author identified reviewers Editors Author-supplied reviewers Editor-supplied reviewers Expert PEERJ Community Members Academic EditorsScientific Community Referees Editors Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics Reviewers Editors Reviewers Editors
  23. 23. Garry Knight flic.kr/p/7qw7iv CC-BY

Editor's Notes

  • Take a few minutes with your neighbor to discuss. And define.
  • Ask what people know about it. Talk about the ethos of open.
  • Disclosure
  • A note on recruitment – I notice that some BMJ places offer discounted subscriptions, others like PEERJ offer discount on memberships.
  • Why are most examples in STEM?
  • Wrap-up

×