Work

Towards improving peer review: Crowd-sourced insights from Twitter

Year: 2022

Type: article

Abstract: Peer review is an essential part of academic publishing, yet many authors, reviewers, and editors have reportedly encountered problems with the review process. Some scholars view peer-review as a necessary process for the advancement of science, while other scholars argue that for many publishers and journals, both authors and reviewers are being exploited. The aim of this commentary is two-fold. First, to provide a narrative review of current perspectives and available research on the peer-review process to date, and second, to summarise potential solutions elicited from scholars on Twitter. A review of the literature identified several problems with peer-review including publication delays, an over reliance on a narrow pool of reviewers, threats to anonymity, perceived exploitation, as well as overworked editors. Recommendations to redress these issues that emerged from scholars on Twitter suggested publishers, journals, their editors and associate editors, universities, individual academics and their communities all have a role to play towards creating an equitable and fair system. This commentary aims to ignite conversations about improving the peer-review process.

Source: Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice

DOI: 10.53761/1.19.3.2

Authors: Kelly-Ann Allen, Jonathan Reardon, Yumin Lu, David Smith, Emily Rainsford, Lucas Walsh

Institutions: Monash University, Durham University, The University of Melbourne, Temple University, Newcastle University

Language: English

Topic: Publishing and Scholarly Communication

Subfield: History and Philosophy of Science

Field: Arts and Humanities

Domain: Social Sciences

Open Access status: diamond

OpenAlex ID: W4401064022

FWCI: 5.406

Cites: 33

Cited by: 8

Related to: 10