Maintaining Live Discussion in Two-Stage Open Peer Review
Sandewall, Erik 2012 (English)In: Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, ISSN 1662-5188, Vol. 6, no 9Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Open peer review has been proposed for a number of reasons, in particular, for increasing the transparency of the article selection process for a journal, and for obtaining a broader basis for feedback to the authors and for the acceptance decision. The review discussion may also in itself have a value for the research community. These goals rely on the existence of a lively review discussion, but several experiments with open-process peer review in recent years have encountered the problem of faltering review discussions. The present article addresses the question of how lively review discussion may be fostered by relating the experience of the journal Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence (ETAI) which was an early experiment with open peer review. Factors influencing the discussion activity are identified. It is observed that it is more difficult to obtain lively discussion when the number of contributed articles increases, which implies difficulties for scaling up the open peer review model. Suggestions are made for how this difficulty may be overcome.
open peer review, community peer review, two-stage peer review, live discussion
National CategoryOther Electrical Engineering, Electronic Engineering, Information Engineering
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-75915DOI: 10.3389/fncom.2012.00009ISI: 000301131200001OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-75915DiVA: diva2:510488
funding agencies|Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation||2012-03-162012-03-162014-10-29