Page 1 of 1

Manipulating the Peer Review Process: Blog post

Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 9:04 am
by cboone
And why are we not talking about this? ... prevented/

In a contribution to the LSE Blog on The Impact of the Social Sciences, Sneha Kulkarni highlights issues that should concern us all. Inter alia, she flags problems inherent in the common practice of allowing authors to suggest reviewers.

Broadening the discussion to include the issue of peer review would surely change some of the dynamics of the DART process in Political Science.

Re: Manipulating the Peer Review Process: Blog post

Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:52 pm
by Marcus Kreuzer
Interesting link. It discusses how authors manipulate on occasion the review process and what journals are doing to address it. It also claims that such manipulations are one of the reasons why we see more and more journal retractions.

This raises the question of whether the peer review process should become part of DA-RT initiative. The peer review process arguably is the least transparent element of the larger research process. There are some reasons for this but as the Boone's link makes clear there is a lot of experimenting going in other fields.

The link also points to the increase number of retractions in various disciplines. It would be wrong to blame this exclusively on flaws in the journal review process. This also suggests that there is considerable room for improving the individual scholars' research transparency. It challenges the claim of various other posts who ask whether there even is a problem that DA-RT is trying to solve.