Blog
About

Category: Review & Rating

Peer Review by Endorsement (PRE)

At its heart Peer Review is an assessment and endorsement of the publication – the addition to the research literature, and so to the scientific discourse – of a set of research results by a researcher’s peers. It is an evaluation by and for the scientific community. However, in the last decades it has evolved ever more into a tool for the publishing industry (and funding bodies, universities, etc.) to anticipate likely impact. At ScienceOpen we would like to focus on the science and return Peer Review to its primary purpose: for the scientific community. We are running two experiments on how to do so – Post Publication Peer Review (PPPR) and Peer Review by Endorsement (PRE).

Peer Review by Endorsement (PRE) allows the researcher to choose two or more fellow scientists (peers) to evaluate the validity and clarity of their hypothesis/methods/results and give them feedback on how to improve their work before it is published. We believe that Peer Review can be – and should be – conducted as a civilized dialogue among equals that results in better science and a higher quality of the public scientific discourse.

A few rules apply:

  • Reviewers should be chosen who have no competing interests.
  • Reviewers should generally follow the ScienceOpen Peer Review Guidelines. We strongly encourage reviewers to take the practice of open science into account when working with authors. Did the authors deposit all relevant research data, data sets, and protocols in a public domain database or repository? Do the authors share research tools (reagents, cell lines, animal models, vectors etc.)?
  • Reviewers’ names will be printed on the published version together with the following statement: I have read this article, given feedback to the authors and now feel that it is of appropriate quality to be included in the scientific literature and be part of the open scientific discourse.
  • Reviewers may – and are encouraged to – add further motivation and comments to this statement.
  • Instead, or in addition, reviewers may publish their views with the consent of the author as a Post-Publication Peer Review report and receive a DOI and credit for their work.

 

PRE reviewed articles should be submitted to the ScienceOpen Editorial Office (editorial@scienceopen.com) for editorial approval. ScienceOpen will also carry out a check on the identity of the reviewers, and if necessary, complete their identifiers (e.g. ORCID).

Approved articles will be charged a publishing fee of US$ 400 with includes the publication of 1 revision, if required, within 12 months. (See How much does it cost?)

Competing Interests

Reviewers must declare if they have any potential conflicts of interest that may influence their independent judgment and hence result in positively or negatively biased reviews. Declaration of competing interests aims to allow others to evaluate the autonomy and neutrality of the reviewer’s judgment. Competing interests generally arise from personal, financial or professional/academic relationships that result in a divergence between the reviewer’s private interests and his/her responsibilities as neutral reviewer.

Continue reading “Competing Interests”