Peer review is typically conducted behind closed doors. There's been a recent push to make open peer review standard, but what's often left out of these conversations are the potential downsides. To illustrate this, Dan and James discuss a recent instance of open peer review that led to considerable online debate.
Here's what they cover...
- How should we navigate the open review of preprints?
- Gate keepers gonna gate keep, but is this better out in the open?
- Weaponising openness
- Some people don't realise that some data can’t be shared
- Should the reviewers of rejected papers follow them to the next journal?
- When bad papers that you reject pop up in another journal, unchanged
- Does the venue and timing of the open peer review matter?
- Signing your reviews
- Using publons to track your reviews
Links
- Brad Love’s blog post: http://bradlove.org/blog/open-review
- Niko’s blog post: https://nikokriegeskorte.org/2019/01/09/whats-the-best-measure-of-representational-dissimilarity/
- Publons: https://publons.com
- Dan on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana
- James on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers
- Everything Hertz on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
- Everything Hertz on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/
Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/
Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!
- $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show
- $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)