Multi-stage open peer review: scientific evaluation integrating the strengths of traditional peer review with the virtues of transparency and self-regulation

被引:50
|
作者
Poeschl, Ulrich [1 ]
机构
[1] Max Planck Inst Chem, D-55128 Mainz, Germany
关键词
open evaluation; public peer review; open access publishing; interactive discussion; open peer commentary; transparency; self-regulation; PREDICTIVE-VALIDITY;
D O I
10.3389/fncom.2012.00033
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
The traditional forms of scientific publishing and peer review do not live up to all demands of efficient communication and quality assurance in today's highly diverse and rapidly evolving world of science. They need to be advanced and complemented by interactive and transparent forms of review, publication, and discussion that are open to the scientific community and to the public. The advantages of open access, public peer review, and interactive discussion can be efficiently and flexibly combined with the strengths of traditional scientific peer review. Since 2001 the benefits and viability of this approach are clearly demonstrated by the highly successful interactive open access journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics( ACP, www.atmos-chem-phys.net) and a growing number of sister journals launched and operated by the European Geosciences Union(EGU,www.egu.eu) and the open access publisher Copernicus(www.copernicus.org). The interactive open access journals are practicing an integrative multi-stage process of publication and peer review combined with interactive public discussion, which effectively resolves the dilemma between rapid scientific exchange and thorough quality assurance. Key features and achievements of this approach are: top quality and impact, efficient self-regulation and low rejection rates, high attractivity and rapid growth, low costs, and financial sustainability. Infact, ACP and the EGU interactive open access sister journals are by most if not all standards more successful than comparable scientific journals with traditional or alternative forms of peer review( editorial statistics, publication statistics, citation statistics, economic costs, and sustainability). The high efficiency and predictive validity of multi-stage open peer review have been confirmed in a series of dedicated studies by evaluation experts from the social sciences, and the same or similar concepts have recently also been adopted in other disciplines, including the life sciences and economics. Multi-stage open peer review can be flexibly adjusted to the needs and peculiarities of different scientific communities. Due to the flexibility and compatibility with traditional structures of scientific publishing and peer review, the multi-stage open peer review concept enables efficient evolution in scientific communication and quality assurance. It has the potential for swift replacement of hidden peer review as the standard of scientific quality assurance, and it provides a basis for open evaluation in science.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 14 条
  • [1] Interactive open access publishing and public peer review: The effectiveness of transparency and self-regulation in scientific quality assurance
    Poeschl, Ulrich
    IFLA JOURNAL-INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF LIBRARY ASSOCIATIONS, 2010, 36 (01): : 40 - 46
  • [2] PEER-REVIEW - THE FOUNDATION OF SELF-REGULATION
    SAXLEHNER, AC
    HURDMAN, M
    JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTANCY, 1984, 157 (01): : 88 - &
  • [3] PROFESSIONAL SELF-REGULATION - PEER-REVIEW
    DIANGELIS, AJ
    SPEIDEL, TM
    DENTAL CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1985, 29 (03) : 437 - 447
  • [4] PEER-REVIEW FILINGS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS IN EVALUATING SELF-REGULATION
    WALLACE, WA
    AUDITING-A JOURNAL OF PRACTICE & THEORY, 1991, 10 (01): : 53 - 68
  • [5] A case for revisiting peer review: Implications for professional self-regulation and quality improvement
    Hill, Terry E.
    Martelli, Peter F.
    Kuo, Julie H.
    PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (06):
  • [6] The credibility of self-regulation: Evidence from the accounting profession's peer review program
    Hilary, G
    Lennox, C
    JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING & ECONOMICS, 2005, 40 (1-3): : 211 - 229
  • [7] Study on Peer Review and Multi-indicators Evaluation in Scientific and Technological Assessment
    Yu Liping
    Pan Yuntao
    Yang chun
    Wu Yishan
    KAM: 2008 INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION AND MODELING, PROCEEDINGS, 2008, : 794 - 798
  • [8] Ethics and Professionalism: The Role of Self-Regulation and Peer Review in Maintaining Hand Surgery's Standards
    Lifchez, Scott D.
    Adams, Julie E.
    JOURNAL OF HAND SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2020, 45 (11): : 1065 - 1069
  • [9] Continuous professional development: The Ontario experience in professional self-regulation through quality assurance and peer review
    Austin, Z
    Croteau, D
    Marini, A
    Violato, C
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION, 2003, 67 (02)
  • [10] Gender diversity of research consortia contributes to funding decisions in a multi-stage grant peer-review process
    Stefano Bianchini
    Patrick Llerena
    Sıla Öcalan-Özel
    Emre Özel
    Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9