Category: peer review

For journals: Benefits of our Private for Peer Review mode

Many journals rely on Dryad to publish data connected to research articles. We make it simple for editors to ensure underlying data is accessible through submission and peer review with Private for Peer Review.  With this functionality, at the poi…

For Epistemic Respect – Against Reviewer 2

Despite the efforts of journals and editors to the contrary, the well-known academic folk-devil, Reviewer 2 continues to make the lives of researchers miserable. Gorgi Krlev and Andre Spicer draw on a recent encounter with reviewer 2 and the subsequent…

Can artificial intelligence assess the quality of academic journal articles in the next REF?

In this blog post Mike Thelwall, Kayvan Kousha, Paul Wilson, Mahshid Abdoli, Meiko Makita, Emma Stuart and Jonathan Levitt discuss the results of a recent project for UKRI that made recommendations about whether artificial intelligence (AI) could be us…

The case against Revise and Resubmit

Extensive revising is required by many journals in the social sciences. It is expected that authors “revise and resubmit” (R&R) their manuscripts several times before they are accepted for publication, a process that is time consuming, demoralising…

Peer review for academic jobs and grants continues to be shaped by metrics, especially if your reviewer is highly ranked

The aim of peer review for research grants and academic hiring boards is to provide expert independent judgement on the quality of research proposals and candidates. Based on findings from a recent survey, Liv Langfeldt, Dag W. Aksnes and Ingvild Reyme…

What does COVID-19 mean for the evaluation of the Impact criterion in REF2021?

The concept of research impact represents, to a degree, a formal way of understanding the productive relationships forged between academic research and the wider world. Unsurprisingly, these relationships took on entirely new dimensions as the COVID-19…