What is it about?
This paper is about reviewers suggesting a decision as a recommendation alongside their peer review report. We consider whether the range of effects this could have on the editorial process, and whether it is appropriate for reviewers to make these recommendations, or an overall decision label should be left to the judgement of the Editor alone.
Featured Image
Photo by Edvin Johansson on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Transparency and accountability are becoming increasingly well-recognised as important underpinnings of reliable and trustworthy science. This recommendation stage of the review process is somewhat obscure, inconsistent, and has not been properly investigated before. Drawing attention to this aspect of the peer review process and clarifying responsibilities is important for the integrity of the reviewing process; and may help journals establish clearer guidance and a fairer experience for authors and editors.
Perspectives
Was great to work with such a stellar group of people to write this paper. Seems we barely know anything about this relatively controversial part of the review process. This paper looks at where the boundary between reviewer and editor lies, and makes some suggestions to enhance the transparency and fairness of the process.
Duncan Nicholas
DN Journal Publishing Services
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Boon, bias or bane? The potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decision-making, February 2019, European Association of Science Editors,
DOI: 10.20316/ese.2019.45.18013.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
