What is open peer review? A systematic review [version 2; referees: 1 approved, 3 approved with reservations]

Background: “Open peer review” (OPR), despite being a major pillar of Open Science, has neither a standardized definition nor an agreed schema of its features and implementations. The literature reflects this, with numerous overlapping and contradictory definitions. While for some the term refers to...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Tony Ross-Hellauer
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: F1000 Research Ltd 2017-08-01
Series:F1000Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://f1000research.com/articles/6-588/v2
id doaj-88721633e4d54eb2aca98a6b8ee90d81
record_format Article
spelling doaj-88721633e4d54eb2aca98a6b8ee90d812020-11-25T04:04:02ZengF1000 Research LtdF1000Research2046-14022017-08-01610.12688/f1000research.11369.213517What is open peer review? A systematic review [version 2; referees: 1 approved, 3 approved with reservations]Tony Ross-Hellauer0Göttingen State and University Library, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, 37073, GermanyBackground: “Open peer review” (OPR), despite being a major pillar of Open Science, has neither a standardized definition nor an agreed schema of its features and implementations. The literature reflects this, with numerous overlapping and contradictory definitions. While for some the term refers to peer review where the identities of both author and reviewer are disclosed to each other, for others it signifies systems where reviewer reports are published alongside articles. For others it signifies both of these conditions, and for yet others it describes systems where not only “invited experts” are able to comment. For still others, it includes a variety of combinations of these and other novel methods. Methods: Recognising the absence of a consensus view on what open peer review is, this article undertakes a systematic review of definitions of “open peer review” or “open review”, to create a corpus of 122 definitions. These definitions are systematically analysed to build a coherent typology of the various innovations in peer review signified by the term, and hence provide the precise technical definition currently lacking. Results: This quantifiable data yields rich information on the range and extent of differing definitions over time and by broad subject area. Quantifying definitions in this way allows us to accurately portray exactly how ambiguously the phrase “open peer review” has been used thus far, for the literature offers 22 distinct configurations of seven traits, effectively meaning that there are 22 different definitions of OPR in the literature reviewed. Conclusions: I propose a pragmatic definition of open peer review as an umbrella term for a number of overlapping ways that peer review models can be adapted in line with the aims of Open Science, including making reviewer and author identities open, publishing review reports and enabling greater participation in the peer review process.https://f1000research.com/articles/6-588/v2Data SharingPublic EngagementPublishing & Peer ReviewWeb and Social Media
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Tony Ross-Hellauer
spellingShingle Tony Ross-Hellauer
What is open peer review? A systematic review [version 2; referees: 1 approved, 3 approved with reservations]
F1000Research
Data Sharing
Public Engagement
Publishing & Peer Review
Web and Social Media
author_facet Tony Ross-Hellauer
author_sort Tony Ross-Hellauer
title What is open peer review? A systematic review [version 2; referees: 1 approved, 3 approved with reservations]
title_short What is open peer review? A systematic review [version 2; referees: 1 approved, 3 approved with reservations]
title_full What is open peer review? A systematic review [version 2; referees: 1 approved, 3 approved with reservations]
title_fullStr What is open peer review? A systematic review [version 2; referees: 1 approved, 3 approved with reservations]
title_full_unstemmed What is open peer review? A systematic review [version 2; referees: 1 approved, 3 approved with reservations]
title_sort what is open peer review? a systematic review [version 2; referees: 1 approved, 3 approved with reservations]
publisher F1000 Research Ltd
series F1000Research
issn 2046-1402
publishDate 2017-08-01
description Background: “Open peer review” (OPR), despite being a major pillar of Open Science, has neither a standardized definition nor an agreed schema of its features and implementations. The literature reflects this, with numerous overlapping and contradictory definitions. While for some the term refers to peer review where the identities of both author and reviewer are disclosed to each other, for others it signifies systems where reviewer reports are published alongside articles. For others it signifies both of these conditions, and for yet others it describes systems where not only “invited experts” are able to comment. For still others, it includes a variety of combinations of these and other novel methods. Methods: Recognising the absence of a consensus view on what open peer review is, this article undertakes a systematic review of definitions of “open peer review” or “open review”, to create a corpus of 122 definitions. These definitions are systematically analysed to build a coherent typology of the various innovations in peer review signified by the term, and hence provide the precise technical definition currently lacking. Results: This quantifiable data yields rich information on the range and extent of differing definitions over time and by broad subject area. Quantifying definitions in this way allows us to accurately portray exactly how ambiguously the phrase “open peer review” has been used thus far, for the literature offers 22 distinct configurations of seven traits, effectively meaning that there are 22 different definitions of OPR in the literature reviewed. Conclusions: I propose a pragmatic definition of open peer review as an umbrella term for a number of overlapping ways that peer review models can be adapted in line with the aims of Open Science, including making reviewer and author identities open, publishing review reports and enabling greater participation in the peer review process.
topic Data Sharing
Public Engagement
Publishing & Peer Review
Web and Social Media
url https://f1000research.com/articles/6-588/v2
work_keys_str_mv AT tonyrosshellauer whatisopenpeerreviewasystematicreviewversion2referees1approved3approvedwithreservations
_version_ 1724438032922181632