[open-science] Open Peer Review

Carl Boettiger cboettig at gmail.com
Sun Dec 11 22:34:55 UTC 2011

Very interesting thread.  Sounds like open peer review can mean a lot of
different things - perhaps better terminology is needed?  A few other
examples for the list:

Biology Direct has always practiced open peer review in which reviews are
solicited; then having received the reviews (either positive or negative)
the author can opt to have the paper published, can make changes & publish,
or can withdraw the paper. Any time the paper is published the reviews are
published with it, with the reviewers name, and with the author's reply to
the reviews. http://www.biology-direct.com/

The Nature journal EMBO has an innovative but less extreme process where
reviews are solicited, identities are included, but the reviews are
published (as a supplement) only if the paper is accepted. The open review
is opt-in, with 95% opting in. Interestingly reviewers are encouraged to
"cross-review" or comment on remarks of other reviewers. They have stats
showing that about 10% of the time people download the peer-review comments
when they download the paper, comparable to downloads of traditional
supplements. http://www.nature.com/emboj/about/process.html

Nature did an experiment with its flagship journal on unsolicited open peer
review in 2006 in parallel with it's traditional peer review. They deemed
it unsuccessful due to low opt-in rates among authors and few & lower
quality reviews in the open.

Victoria Stodden had a good discussion about this on her blog a while back,
but something seems wrong with the site now?


On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Ulrich Herb <u.herb at scinoptica.com> wrote:

> Dear Graham,
> sorry, but this link:
>  <https://plus.google.com/u/0/**107449381177524115065/posts/**5iQoPnuY5R8<https://plus.google.com/u/0/107449381177524115065/posts/5iQoPnuY5R8>>
>> on
>> Google+
> doesn't seem to work.
> Perhaps this journal might be of interest for your list: atmospheric
> chemistry & physics is very successful in using open peer review
> http://www.atmospheric-**chemistry-and-physics.net/<http://www.atmospheric-chemistry-and-physics.net/>
> best
> Ulrich
> --
> Ulrich Herb
> Postfach 10 13 13
> D-66013 Saarbrücken
> http://www.scinoptica.com
> +49-(0)157 84759877
> http://twitter.com/#!/**scinoptica <http://twitter.com/#%21/scinoptica>
> ______________________________**_________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/**listinfo/open-science<http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science>

Carl Boettiger
UC Davis
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20111211/023b21da/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the open-science mailing list