-
Journal of Experimental Psychology.... Dec 2023Peer review is a core component of scientific practice. Although peer review ideally improves research and promotes rigor, it also has consequences for what types of...
Peer review is a core component of scientific practice. Although peer review ideally improves research and promotes rigor, it also has consequences for what types of research are published and cited and who wants to (and is able to) advance in research-focused careers. Despite these consequences, few reviewers or editors receive training or oversight to ensure their feedback is helpful, professional, and culturally sensitive. Here, we critically examine the peer-review system in psychology and neuroscience at multiple levels, from ideas to institutions, interactions, and individuals. We highlight initiatives that aim to change the normative negativity of peer review and provide authors with constructive, actionable feedback that is sensitive to diverse identities, methods, topics, and environments. We conclude with a call to action for how individuals, groups, and organizations can improve the culture of peer review. We provide examples of how changes in the peer-review system can be made with an eye to diversity (increasing the range of identities and experiences constituting the field), equity (fair processes and outcomes across groups), and inclusion (experiences that promote belonging across groups). These changes can improve scientists' experience of peer review, promote diverse perspectives and identities, and enhance the quality and impact of science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
Topics: Peer Review; Psychology
PubMed: 37676130
DOI: 10.1037/xge0001461 -
International Journal of Toxicology 2024Peer review is essential to preserving the integrity of the scientific publication process. Peer reviewers must adhere to the norms of the peer review process, including... (Review)
Review
Peer review is essential to preserving the integrity of the scientific publication process. Peer reviewers must adhere to the norms of the peer review process, including confidentiality, avoiding actual or apparent conflicts of interest, timeliness, constructiveness, and thoroughness. This mini review will discuss some of the different formats in which peer review might occur, as well as advantages and disadvantages of each. The topics then shift to providing advice for prospective reviewers, as well as a suggested format for use in writing a review.
Topics: Peer Review, Research; Humans; Peer Review; Publishing; Writing
PubMed: 38767005
DOI: 10.1177/10915818241254582 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Dec 2023Five years ago, we wrote to you regarding our launching a new initiative for JAACAP: study registration. As we noted then, "study registration divides the peer review...
Five years ago, we wrote to you regarding our launching a new initiative for JAACAP: study registration. As we noted then, "study registration divides the peer review process into two stages. The first stage, preregistration, occurs at the time that the study is being planned, whereas the second occurs after the study is completed." To preregister their study, authors submit a manuscript consisting of the introduction and method sections for their study, along with a study synopsis, for peer review. If the study preregistration is approved after this initial peer review, the Journal will issue an in-principle acceptance to the authors, and the study synopsis will be published in JAACAP as a registered study protocol. When the study is completed, the authors will submit a complete manuscript, using the introduction and method sections that have already been reviewed and accepted (with an updated literature review) as well as their new results and discussion sections. This complete manuscript will undergo a second peer review focused on how consistent the manuscript is with the study's preregistration. If the paper is then accepted, it will be published as a Registered Report. We are pleased to report that with this issue of the Journal we have now published 2 such research articles, each demonstrating the strengths of this process.
Topics: Humans; Publications; Writing
PubMed: 38035914
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaac.2023.09.532 -
Nature Communications Mar 2024To build pathways to constructive and engaging peer review for the next generation of scientists, we invite all our reviewers to co-review with an Early Career...
To build pathways to constructive and engaging peer review for the next generation of scientists, we invite all our reviewers to co-review with an Early Career Researcher in their group and let us know. We will ensure ECRs are recognised for their contribution.
PubMed: 38443342
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-45269-0 -
Tidsskrift For Den Norske Laegeforening... Nov 2023
Topics: Humans; Ownership; Peer Review, Research; Publishing; Peer Group
PubMed: 37987061
DOI: 10.4045/tidsskr.23.0751 -
The Journal of Chiropractic Education Oct 2023The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of the methods used and feedback from reviewers about the peer review process for the 2023 Association of Chiropractic...
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of the methods used and feedback from reviewers about the peer review process for the 2023 Association of Chiropractic Colleges Educational Conference and Research Agenda Conference (ACC-RAC).
METHODS
After the peer review process was complete, the 2023 ACC-RAC peer review committee members were invited to provide feedback through an anonymous electronic form. The survey included a Likert scale to rate items about the peer review process and an option for open-ended comments.
RESULTS
Of the 166 peer reviewers, 77 (46%) completed the survey. The reviewers represented 9 countries, with the greatest number from North America. The majority (95%) of respondents rated the process of peer review in topic groups as good to excellent, and the majority (92%) of respondents rated the overall 2023 peer review process as good to excellent. The critical comments that were submitted are addressed in this report.
CONCLUSION
Overall, peer reviewer satisfaction with the process used for the 2023 ACC-RAC was high. We will include information from this report as part of the continuous quality improvement of peer review process, an important part of improving chiropractic education, research, and scholarly activities.
PubMed: 37721857
DOI: 10.7899/JCE-23-20 -
MBio Nov 2023There is concern that the time taken to publish academic papers in microbiological science has significantly increased in recent years. While the data do not...
There is concern that the time taken to publish academic papers in microbiological science has significantly increased in recent years. While the data do not specifically support this, evidence suggests that editors are having to invite more and more reviewers to identify those willing to perform peer review.
PubMed: 37975666
DOI: 10.1128/mbio.01091-23 -
Journal of Clinical and Translational... 2024Research articles in the clinical and translational science literature commonly use quantitative data to inform evaluation of interventions, learn about the etiology of... (Review)
Review
Research articles in the clinical and translational science literature commonly use quantitative data to inform evaluation of interventions, learn about the etiology of disease, or develop methods for diagnostic testing or risk prediction of future events. The peer review process must evaluate the methodology used therein, including use of quantitative statistical methods. In this manuscript, we provide guidance for peer reviewers tasked with assessing quantitative methodology, intended to complement guidelines and recommendations that exist for manuscript authors. We describe components of clinical and translational science research manuscripts that require assessment including study design and hypothesis evaluation, sampling and data acquisition, interventions (for studies that include an intervention), measurement of data, statistical analysis methods, presentation of the study results, and interpretation of the study results. For each component, we describe what reviewers should look for and assess; how reviewers should provide helpful comments for fixable errors or omissions; and how reviewers should communicate uncorrectable and irreparable errors. We then discuss the critical concepts of transparency and acceptance/revision guidelines when communicating with responsible journal editors.
PubMed: 38384899
DOI: 10.1017/cts.2023.707 -
Brain Communications 2024Our editor discusses our editorial board members, who come from eight countries on four continents, and wider issues of the peer review system.
Our editor discusses our editorial board members, who come from eight countries on four continents, and wider issues of the peer review system.
PubMed: 38444910
DOI: 10.1093/braincomms/fcae029 -
Journal of Transcultural Nursing :... May 2024
Topics: Humans; Peer Review; Publishing
PubMed: 38651822
DOI: 10.1177/10436596241247667