What are innovations in peer review and editorial assessment for?

[...]these journals publish very large numbers of open access articles, with relatively moderate Author Processing Charges. [...]various initiatives have been developed to increase the detail in research reports, in particular with respect to methods. ‘Double blind’ reviews (or even ‘triple blind’,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Genome Biology 2020-05, Vol.21 (1), p.87-87, Article 87
Main Authors: Halffman, Willem, Horbach, Serge P J M
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Antibodies
Business models
Editorials
Fraud
Gender
Innovations
Laboratory animals
Medical research
Open access
Peer review
Plagiarism
Publishing industry
Researchers
Technological change
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:[...]these journals publish very large numbers of open access articles, with relatively moderate Author Processing Charges. [...]various initiatives have been developed to increase the detail in research reports, in particular with respect to methods. ‘Double blind’ reviews (or even ‘triple blind’, if author and reviewer identities are anonymised to editors) are expected to encourage reviewers and editors to focus on content, rather than to be influenced by authors’ identities, affiliations, or academic power positions. [...]whether single or double blind is ‘better’ is not just a matter of whether more errors are filtered out, but also of fairness (gender, institutional address), of whether the more significant papers are (or should be) selected, whether reproducibility is improved, whether fraud is traced, and all these other mixed or even incompatible expectations. [...]the possibilities for editorial improvement do not present themselves in a void.
ISSN:1474-760X
1474-7596
1474-760X
DOI:10.1186/s13059-020-02004-4