liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Open up: a survey on open and non-anonymized peer reviewing
Linköping University, Department of Science and Technology, Media and Information Technology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering. (Information Visualization)
Linköping University, Department of Science and Technology, Media and Information Technology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering. (Information Visualization)
Linköping University, Department of Science and Technology, Media and Information Technology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering. (Media Design and Image Reproduction)ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5678-6565
Southern Denmark University Library, Odense, Denmark; Universite de Paris, Rue Charles V, Paris, France; Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education, Ubud, Indonesia.
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: BMC Research Integrity and Peer Review, ISSN 2058-8615, Vol. 5, no 8, p. 1-11Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background

Our aim is to highlight the benefits and limitations of open and non-anonymized peer review. Our argument is based on the literature and on responses to a survey on the reviewing process of alt.chi, a more or less open review track within the so-called Computer Human Interaction (CHI) conference, the predominant conference in the field of human-computer interaction. This track currently is the only implementation of an open peer review process in the field of human-computer interaction while, with the recent increase in interest in open scientific practices, open review is now being considered and used in other fields.

Methods

We ran an online survey with 30 responses from alt.chi authors and reviewers, collecting quantitative data using multiple-choice questions and Likert scales. Qualitative data were collected using open questions.

Results

Our main quantitative result is that respondents are more positive to open and non-anonymous reviewing for alt.chi than for other parts of the CHI conference. The qualitative data specifically highlight the benefits of open and transparent academic discussions. The data and scripts are available on https://osf.io/vuw7h/, and the figures and follow-up work on http://tiny.cc/OpenReviews.

Conclusion

While the benefits are quite clear and the system is generally well-liked by alt.chi participants, they remain reluctant to see it used in other venues. This concurs with a number of recent studies that suggest a divergence between support for a more open review process and its practical implementation.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BioMed Central, 2020. Vol. 5, no 8, p. 1-11
Keywords [en]
Peer review, Open science
National Category
Information Systems, Social aspects
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-167194DOI: 10.1186/s41073-020-00094-zISI: 000545677900001PubMedID: 32607252OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-167194DiVA, id: diva2:1448586
Available from: 2020-06-29 Created: 2020-06-29 Last updated: 2022-12-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(823 kB)343 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 823 kBChecksum SHA-512
d26a4267562da080156e0bb4c42d2131e45a0c94f3885b7f455351d98c34f87aab77159203db4338d93610ae3d58406ba46d4ba8cdbbf7d659c5083294b9124d
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records

Besançon, LonniRönnberg, NiklasLöwgren, JonasCooper, Matthew

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Besançon, LonniRönnberg, NiklasLöwgren, JonasCooper, Matthew
By organisation
Media and Information TechnologyFaculty of Science & Engineering
Information Systems, Social aspects

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 343 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 199 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf