Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Editor-mediated Peer Review
Panel on integrity, ethics and peer review
APE 2019
Elisa De Ranieri,
Editor-in-Chief, Nature ...
1
Creating a more robust peer review process
• Author contribution statements, 2009
• Double blind peer review, 2015
• Tra...
2
The role of our editors
We work with the research communities.
Develop quality and reproducibility standards for doing
a...
3
Transparency, accountability and trust
There is trust in this system, but we need to keep up.
Can transparency coexist w...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

APE Conference: The Peer Review Process and the Role of Editors

117 views

Published on

To understand more about peer review, the role that editors play, and how accountability and transparency promote ethics and integrity in the process, Nature Communications’ Editor in Chief Elisa De Ranieri shares her slides from APE Conference 2019.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

APE Conference: The Peer Review Process and the Role of Editors

  1. 1. Editor-mediated Peer Review Panel on integrity, ethics and peer review APE 2019 Elisa De Ranieri, Editor-in-Chief, Nature Communications e.deranieri@nature.com 16 January 2019
  2. 2. 1 Creating a more robust peer review process • Author contribution statements, 2009 • Double blind peer review, 2015 • Transparent peer review, 2016 • Under Consideration, 2017 • Reviewer recognition, 2018 Editor-mediated peer review is evolving We can do more in 2019 Publishing editorial letters? Registered Reports? Support diversity? Research ethics and integrity Publishing ethics and integrity Community ethics and integrity Illustrations from Pixabay
  3. 3. 2 The role of our editors We work with the research communities. Develop quality and reproducibility standards for doing and reporting research. Applied via editorial policy and using checklists during review process. Full-time, professional editors are independent. Less competing interests and more objectivity in decisions. Reviewer selection essential to maintain integrity of published material: our editors have the competence (and time!) to provide a high-quality peer review experience. “There was a substantial improvement in the reporting of risks of bias in in vivo research in NPG journals following a change in editorial policy.” Macleod et al. https://doi.org/10.1101/187245
  4. 4. 3 Transparency, accountability and trust There is trust in this system, but we need to keep up. Can transparency coexist with temporarily withholding information (e.g. double blind model)? Editors Reviewers Authors Readers Identity Content Process

×