What is open peer review? A systematic review

Abstract

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.

References 76

1. 1.

   This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

   Not in our library

2. 2.

   This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

   Not in our library

3. 3.

   This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

   Not in our library

4. 4.

   This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

   Not in our library

5. 5.

   This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

   Not in our library

6. 6.

   This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

   Not in our library

7. 7.

   This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

   Not in our library

8. 8.

   This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

   Not in our library

9. 9.

   This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

   Not in our library

10. 10.
    Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data · 2010

    No notice
11. 11.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

12. 12.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

13. 13.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

14. 14.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

15. 15.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

16. 16.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

17. 17.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

18. 18.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

19. 19.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

20. 20.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

21. 21.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

22. 22.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

23. 23.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

24. 24.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

25. 25.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

26. 26.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

27. 27.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

28. 28.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

29. 29.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

30. 30.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

31. 31.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

32. 32.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

33. 33.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

34. 34.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

35. 35.
    Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased? · 2013

    Corrected
36. 36.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

37. 37.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

38. 38.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

39. 39.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

40. 40.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

41. 41.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

42. 42.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

43. 43.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

44. 44.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

45. 45.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

46. 46.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

47. 47.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

48. 48.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

49. 49.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

50. 50.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

51. 51.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

52. 52.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

53. 53.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

54. 54.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

55. 55.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

56. 56.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

57. 57.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

58. 58.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

59. 59.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

60. 60.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

61. 61.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

62. 62.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

63. 63.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

64. 64.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

65. 65.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

66. 66.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

67. 67.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

68. 68.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

69. 69.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

70. 70.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

71. 71.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

72. 72.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

73. 73.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

74. 74.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

75. 75.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

76. 76.

    This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.

    Not in our library

Cited by papers we hold 4

• Open science saves lives: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic · 2021
  No notice
• Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing · 2019
  Not checked
• The changing forms and expectations of peer review · 2018
  Not checked
• The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future · 2018
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.