[Irtalk] Open peer review 'better quality' than traditional process | Times Higher Education

[Hilton Gibson]

*Open peer review produces better scrutiny of research than traditional
methods, according to a new study.*

Reviews were found to be of slightly higher quality – around 5 per cent
better – when authors could see who had reviewed their papers and these
assessments were made available with the published article.

Researchers compared 400 papers in two similar journals: BMC Infectious
Diseases, which uses open peer review, and BMC Microbiology, which uses the
common “single-blind” process where reviewers know the identity of the
author but the author does not know who they are being reviewed by.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/open-peer-review-better-quality-than-traditional-process
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lib.sun.ac.za/pipermail/irtalk/attachments/20151015/b0617b8f/attachment.html>