scholarly journals Peer Review #3 of "A guideline for reporting experimental protocols in life sciences (v0.1)"

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
ME Martone
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Experimental Protocols

scholarly journals Transparency of peer review: a semi-structured interview study with chief editors from social sciences and humanities

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Veli-Matti Karhulahti ◽  
Hans-Joachim Backe
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Institutional Policies ◽  
Manuscript Review ◽  
Publication Process ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities

Abstract Background Open peer review practices are increasing in medicine and life sciences, but in social sciences and humanities (SSH) they are still rare. We aimed to map out how editors of respected SSH journals perceive open peer review, how they balance policy, ethics, and pragmatism in the review processes they oversee, and how they view their own power in the process. Methods We conducted 12 pre-registered semi-structured interviews with editors of respected SSH journals. Interviews consisted of 21 questions and lasted an average of 67 min. Interviews were transcribed, descriptively coded, and organized into code families. Results SSH editors saw anonymized peer review benefits to outweigh those of open peer review. They considered anonymized peer review the “gold standard” that authors and editors are expected to follow to respect institutional policies; moreover, anonymized review was also perceived as ethically superior due to the protection it provides, and more pragmatic due to eased seeking of reviewers. Finally, editors acknowledged their power in the publication process and reported strategies for keeping their work as unbiased as possible. Conclusions Editors of SSH journals preferred the benefits of anonymized peer review over open peer and acknowledged the power they hold in the publication process during which authors are almost completely disclosed to editorial bodies. We recommend journals to communicate the transparency elements of their manuscript review processes by listing all bodies who contributed to the decision on every review stage.

scholarly journals Technical and social issues influencing the adoption of preprints in the life sciences

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naomi C Penfold ◽  
Jessica K Polka
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Future Development ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Standard Component

Preprints are gaining visibility in many fields. Thanks to the explosion of bioRxiv, an online server for preprints in biology, versions of manuscripts prior to the completion of journal-organized peer review are poised to become a standard component of the publishing experience in the life sciences. Here we provide an overview of current challenges facing preprints, both technical and social, and a vision for their future development, from unbundling the functions of publication to exploring different communication formats.

scholarly journals Reviewer Acknowledgements

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 64
Author(s):  
Kelvin Lee
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Life Science ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
State University ◽  
Louisiana State University ◽  
National University

Journal of Biology and Life Science (JBLS) would like to acknowledge the following reviewers for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Many authors, regardless of whether JBLS publishes their work, appreciate the helpful feedback provided by the reviewers. Their comments and suggestions were of great help to the authors in improving the quality of their papers. Each of the reviewers listed below returned at least one review for this issue.Reviewers for Volume 12, Number 1Bonam Srinivasa Reddy, INSERM, FranceBratko Filipic, CIETO, SloveniaBruno Edson-Chaves, USP&UECE, BrazilChandra S Bathula, Louisiana State University, USADamir Suljevic, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and HerzegovinaMaciej Jarzębski, Poznan University of Life Sciences, PolandMeltem Sesli, Turkish Biotechnology, TurkeyNatalia Tkachuk, T.H. Shevchenko National University “Chernihiv Colehium”, UkraineRajaa Ahmed Mahmoud, University of Basrah, IraqSridhar Mandali, UCLA, USATayseer Ibrahim Alnaggar, Ain Shams University & Najran University, EgyptXiaohuang Cao, Guangdong Ocean University, ChinaYuliana, Udayana University, Indonesia Kelvin LeeEditorial AssistantJournal of Biology and Life Science-------------------------------------------Macrothink Institute5348 Vegas Dr.#825Las Vegas, Nevada 89108United StatesTel: 1-702-953-1852 ext.510Fax: 1-702-420-2900E-mail: [email protected]: http://jbls.macrothink.org

scholarly journals On the value of preprints: an early career researcher perspective

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarvenaz Sarabipour ◽  
Humberto J Debat ◽  
Edward Emmott ◽  
Steven Burgess ◽  
Benjamin Schwessinger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Journal Publication ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Brand Recognition ◽  
Public Record ◽  
Rapid Dissemination ◽  
Early Career Researcher

Peer-reviewed journal publication is the main means for academic researchers in the life sciences to create a permanent, public record of their work. These publications are also the de facto currency for career progress, with a strong link between journal brand recognition and perceived value. The current peer-review process can lead to long delays between submission and publication, with cycles of rejection, revision and resubmission causing redundant peer review. This situation creates unique challenges for early career researchers (ECRs), who rely heavily on timely publication of their work to gain recognition for their efforts. ECRs face changes in the academic landscape including the increased interdisciplinarity of life sciences research, expansion of the researcher population and consequent shifts in employer and funding demands. The publication of preprints, publicly available scientific manuscripts posted on dedicated preprint servers prior to journal managed peer-review, can play a key role in addressing these ECR challenges. Preprinting benefits include rapid dissemination of academic work, open access, establishing priority or concurrence, receiving feedback and facilitating collaborations. While there is a growing appreciation for and adoption of preprints, a minority of all articles in life sciences and medicine are preprinted. The current low rate of preprint submissions in life sciences and ECR concerns regarding preprinting needs to be addressed. We provide a perspective from an interdisciplinary group of early career researchers on the value of preprints and advocate the wide adoption of preprints to advance knowledge and facilitate career development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document