scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Rewarding peer reviewers: maintaining the integrity of science communication.

TLDR
This article overviews currently available options for rewarding peer reviewers and suggests a strategy of combined rewards and credits for the reviewers seems a workable solution.
Abstract
This article overviews currently available options for rewarding peer reviewers. Rewards and incentives may help maintain the quality and integrity of scholarly publications. Publishers around the world implemented a variety of financial and nonfinancial mechanisms for incentivizing their best reviewers. None of these is proved effective on its own. A strategy of combined rewards and credits for the reviewers1 creative contributions seems a workable solution. Opening access to reviews and assigning publication credits to the best reviews is one of the latest achievements of digitization. Reviews, posted on academic networking platforms, such as Publons, add to the transparency of the whole system of peer review. Reviewer credits, properly counted and displayed on individual digital profiles, help distinguish the best contributors, invite them to review and offer responsible editorial posts.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature

TL;DR: This review provides an extensive account of the state of the art in both scholarly use of social media and altmetrics, reviewing the various functions these platforms have in the scholarly communication process and the factors that affect this use.
Posted Content

Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: a review of the literature

TL;DR: A review of the state-of-the-art in both scholarly use of social media and altmetrics can be found in this article, where the authors examine the role of these platforms in the scholarly communication process and the factors that affect this use.
Journal ArticleDOI

The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise.

TL;DR: The results support that the system is sustainable in terms of volume but emphasizes a considerable imbalance in the distribution of the peer-review effort across the scientific community.
Journal ArticleDOI

Information and Misinformation on COVID-19: a Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

TL;DR: While identifying social media as a potential source of misinformation on COVID-19, and a perceived high risk of plagiarism, more stringent peer review and skilled post-publication promotion are advisable.
Journal ArticleDOI

Researcher and Author Profiles: Opportunities, Advantages, and Limitations.

TL;DR: This article overviews some of the widely used and emerging profiling platforms, highlighting their tools for sharing scholarly items, crediting individuals, and facilitating networking.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

TL;DR: Peer review is at the heart of the processes of not just medical journals but of all of science, the method by which grants are allocated, papers published, academics promoted, and Nobel prizes won, yet it has until recently been unstudied.
Journal ArticleDOI

Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies

TL;DR: Little empirical evidence is available to support the use of editorial peer review as a mechanism to ensure quality of biomedical research and a large, well-funded programme of research on the effects of editorialpeer review should be urgently launched.
Journal ArticleDOI

Why do peer reviewers decline to review? A survey.

TL;DR: Reviewers are more likely to accept to review a manuscript when it is relevant to their area of interest, and lack of time is the principal factor in the decision to decline.
Journal ArticleDOI

Publishing: The peer-review scam

Cat Ferguson, +2 more
- 27 Nov 2014 - 
TL;DR: A journal editor was puzzled by the reviews for manuscripts by one author — Hyung-In Moon, a medicinal-plant researcher then at Dongguk University in Gyeongju, South Korea, who readily admitted that the reviews had come in so quickly because he had written many of them himself.
Journal ArticleDOI

Reviewing Manuscripts for Peer-Review Journals: A Primer for Novice and Seasoned Reviewers

TL;DR: The present article was developed to provide an overview of the peer-review process at Annals of Behavioral Medicine and describe the general and specific elements that should be included in a high-quality review for the journal.
Related Papers (5)