Walker R, Rocha da Silva P. Emerging trends in peer review—a survey. Frontiers in Neuroscience 2015;9:169.
(doi: 10.3389/fnins.2015.00169)
“Classical peer review” has been subject to intense criticism for slowing down the publication process, bias against specific categories of paper and author, unreliability, inability to detect errors and fraud, unethical practices, and the lack of recognition for unpaid reviewers. This paper surveys innovative forms of peer review that attempt to address these issues. According to the authors, the most likely scenario for the coming years is a continued diversification, in which different review mechanisms serve different author, reader, and publisher needs.
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2015.00169/abstract
(doi: 10.3389/fnins.2015.00169)
“Classical peer review” has been subject to intense criticism for slowing down the publication process, bias against specific categories of paper and author, unreliability, inability to detect errors and fraud, unethical practices, and the lack of recognition for unpaid reviewers. This paper surveys innovative forms of peer review that attempt to address these issues. According to the authors, the most likely scenario for the coming years is a continued diversification, in which different review mechanisms serve different author, reader, and publisher needs.
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2015.00169/abstract
Comments