Image from Clipart Library
Open peer review although not a novel trend is a topic of current debate. The process allows authors and reviewers to know each other’s identity. In other models, reviewers’ feedback and authors’ responses are published as part of the final version of the article. Other approaches to implementation include post publication review and comments where the paper is published and a discussion forum initiated. This makes dissemination of information faster. Some journals have adopted this approach for COVID-19 research. Some Biomed, Nature and PLOS journals have embraced open peer review. The benefits of open review are:
- Increased accountability and transparency
- Faster turnaround of research papers
- Reviewers receive due credit as their contribution is openly and publicly acknowledged
- Enriching papers with expert opinions
- Enhances the validity of the papers since readers are privy to the review process
It is however argued that the process may compromise the integrity of the peer review process. Reviewers may also not be as candid as they should be especially if their feedback is not favorable. The question raised is whether open review makes the review process less or more open.
For more on this see Scholarly Communication and Peer Review