Referees' attitudes toward open peer review and electronic transmission of papers

被引:13
|
作者
Melero, R
López-Santoveña, F
机构
[1] Food Sci & Technol Int, Valencia 46100, Spain
[2] CSIC, Inst Agroquim & Tecnol Alimentos, Comp & Stat Unit, Valencia 46100, Spain
关键词
peer review; referees; attitudes; electronic transmission;
D O I
10.1106/0MXD-YM6F-3LM6-G9EB
中图分类号
O69 [应用化学];
学科分类号
081704 ;
摘要
A survey was mailed to 293 referees from the review board of Food Science and Technology International with the following personal characteristics: ages: 35-45 (35%), 45-55 (37%), and 55-65 (27%); 93% PhD graduates; 69% male, 98% researchers, 82% teachers too, 85% review for other journals as well to assess reviewers' attitudes or preferences in favor of or against masking their identity, and toward the electronic transmission of papers for review. The reviewers were mainly from Europe, North America, and South America. The questionnaire was anonymous and asked if respondents were in favor of an open review or masking of the reviewers, and if they agreed with the electronic transmission of the papers for their review (both from the point of view of author and reviewer). The response rate was 35% (103 respondents). The consistency between the answers as being authors or reviewers when asked by the peer review process was significant (P < 0.001) without significant differences in terms of gender or age. Seventy-five percent were in favor of masking reviewers, and 17% completely favored unblinded review. The consistency between the answers for paper transmission was significant (P < 0.001) without significant differences in terms of gender or age. Seventy-five percent were in favor of electronic transmission, 25% were against it. There was a significant association between the answers in favor of or against e-transmission and the age either as reviewers (P = 0.009) or as authors (P = 0.031). The other associations between the system of review and gender or age were not significant. There was a preference among the participants for masking the reviewers, and a tendency to use the Web as the transmission medium because it is considered faster, easier, simpler, and more economic.
引用
收藏
页码:521 / 527
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers
    Ross-Hellauer, Tony
    Deppe, Arvid
    Schmidt, Birgit
    PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (12):
  • [22] PEER REVIEW OF CONFERENCE PAPERS: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUTHORS AND THE PAPERS
    Jose Mas-Ruiz, Francisco
    Ruiz-Conde, Enar
    Calderon-Martinez, Aurora
    Parreno-Selva, Josefa
    4TH INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE (INTED 2010), 2010, : 2344 - 2353
  • [23] o'Peer: open peer review
    Brewer, J. H.
    13TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MUON SPIN ROTATION, RELAXATION AND RESONANCE, 2014, 551
  • [24] Peer Review: Responsibilities of Researchers to Review Papers
    Scanes, Colin G.
    POULTRY SCIENCE, 2008, 87 (12) : 2435 - 2435
  • [25] Open peer review
    Pedri, Patricia
    Araujo, Ronaldo Ferreira
    ATOZ-NOVAS PRATICAS EM INFORMACAO E CONHECIMENTO, 2021, 10 (01): : V - VIII
  • [26] Open Peer Review
    Ferguson, Christine L.
    SERIALS REVIEW, 2020, 46 (04) : 286 - 291
  • [27] Cooperation between Referees and Authors Increases Peer Review Accuracy
    Leek, Jeffrey T.
    Taub, Margaret A.
    Pineda, Fernando J.
    PLOS ONE, 2011, 6 (11):
  • [28] Peer review of clinical science papers
    Greenough, PR
    VETERINARY JOURNAL, 1999, 157 (03): : 218 - 219
  • [29] PEER-REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS
    ARMSTRONG, JS
    JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL RESPONSE MODIFIERS, 1984, 3 (01): : 10 - 14
  • [30] Peer Review Ethics of Scientific Papers
    Awais, Syed Muhammad
    ANNALS OF KING EDWARD MEDICAL UNIVERSITY LAHORE PAKISTAN, 2013, 19 (01): : 1 - 1