Boon, bias or bane? The potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decision-making

Jonathan Tennant; Bart Penders; Tony Ross-Hellauer; Ana Marusic; Flamino Squazzoni; Anson Mackay; David Shaw; Sabina Alam; Bahar Mehmani; Daniel Graziotin; Duncan Nicholas

doi:10.20316/ese.2019.45.18013

Boon, bias or bane? The potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decision-making

Jonathan Tennant^*
, Bart Penders
, Tony Ross-Hellauer
, Ana Marusic
, Flamino Squazzoni
, Anson Mackay
, David Shaw
, Sabina Alam
, Bahar Mehmani
, Daniel Graziotin
, Duncan Nicholas

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Editorial › Academic › peer-review

79 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

No formal investigations have been conducted into the efficacy or potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decisions, and the impact of this on the expectations and behaviour of authors, reviewers and journal editors. This article addresses key questions about this critical aspect of the peer review submission process. We suggest several future steps which could be taken towards improving the review process and make it more transparent, better understood, and fairer for all parties.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	2-5
Number of pages	4
Journal	European Science Editing
Volume	45
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.20316/ese.2019.45.18013
Publication status	Published - 2019

Access to Document

10.20316/ese.2019.45.18013Licence: Other

Full TextFinal published version, 1.06 MBLicence: Taverne

Cite this

@article{612cc56466a24c86bfce709e3ae61e97,

title = "Boon, bias or bane? The potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decision-making",

abstract = "No formal investigations have been conducted into the efficacy or potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decisions, and the impact of this on the expectations and behaviour of authors, reviewers and journal editors. This article addresses key questions about this critical aspect of the peer review submission process. We suggest several future steps which could be taken towards improving the review process and make it more transparent, better understood, and fairer for all parties.",

author = "Jonathan Tennant and Bart Penders and Tony Ross-Hellauer and Ana Marusic and Flamino Squazzoni and Anson Mackay and David Shaw and Sabina Alam and Bahar Mehmani and Daniel Graziotin and Duncan Nicholas",

year = "2019",

doi = "10.20316/ese.2019.45.18013",

language = "English",

volume = "45",

pages = "2--5",

journal = "European Science Editing",

issn = "0258-3127",

publisher = "European Association of Science Editors",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Boon, bias or bane? The potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decision-making

AU - Tennant, Jonathan

AU - Penders, Bart

AU - Ross-Hellauer, Tony

AU - Marusic, Ana

AU - Squazzoni, Flamino

AU - Mackay, Anson

AU - Shaw, David

AU - Alam, Sabina

AU - Mehmani, Bahar

AU - Graziotin, Daniel

AU - Nicholas, Duncan

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - No formal investigations have been conducted into the efficacy or potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decisions, and the impact of this on the expectations and behaviour of authors, reviewers and journal editors. This article addresses key questions about this critical aspect of the peer review submission process. We suggest several future steps which could be taken towards improving the review process and make it more transparent, better understood, and fairer for all parties.

AB - No formal investigations have been conducted into the efficacy or potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decisions, and the impact of this on the expectations and behaviour of authors, reviewers and journal editors. This article addresses key questions about this critical aspect of the peer review submission process. We suggest several future steps which could be taken towards improving the review process and make it more transparent, better understood, and fairer for all parties.

U2 - 10.20316/ese.2019.45.18013

DO - 10.20316/ese.2019.45.18013

M3 - Editorial

SN - 0258-3127

VL - 45

SP - 2

EP - 5

JO - European Science Editing

JF - European Science Editing

IS - 1

ER -

Boon, bias or bane? The potential influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decision-making

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this