Report from the Peer Review Workgroup
The OSI2016 Peer Review workgroup focused on peer review in the context of open scholarÃÂship. The group agreed that greater openness and transparency would improve accountaÃÂbility, minimize bias, and encourage collaboration, but did not underestimate the challenges of openness, nor the variation in readiness across disciplines and publishing modÃÂels. The group recommended facilitation of peer review outside the traditional publication processÃ¢â¬âfor example, in the context of preprint servers and after publicationÃ¢â¬âwith incenÃÂtives for broad participation. These incentives need to include a cultural shift in recognition of peer review as a valid activity contributing to career progression.OSI2016 Workgroup Question
Managing the peer review process is one of the major attractions and benefits of the current publisher-driven publishing environment. Would it be possible to maintain peer review in different system Ã¢â¬â perhaps one where peer review happens at the institutional level, or in an online-review environment? How? What is really needed from peer review, what are the reform options (and what do we already know about the options that have been tried)?
Copyright (c) 2016 OSI2016 Peer Review Workgroup
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.