[GOAL] Taylor & Francis survey: authors value rigorous peer review, even if it takes time

[Wright, Victoria]

Apologies for cross posting

Oxford, April 2013

Taylor & Francis survey: authors value rigorous peer review, even if it
takes time

In the sixth in a series of Press Releases on the themes and findings of
the Open Access Survey, Taylor & Francis investigates authors' preferred
methods of peer review suitable for their research.  Taylor & Francis /
Routledge journals, including those that are part of the Open programme,
benefit from Editor-led rigorous peer review and we wanted to understand
the value and importance of this service to our author base.

Authors' views on the peer review process

Respondents were asked about the kind of peer review they find the most
suitable for their research when publishing an open access article. 

Findings from the survey show that 45% of all respondents would 'always'
value a 'rigorous assessment of the merit and novelty of their article
with constructive comments for its improvement'. Adding those who would
'often' prefer this more traditional style of peer review takes this
figure up to 78%. 

Moving down the scale of rigour, to peer review that 'reviews the
technical soundness of my research without any judgement on its novelty
or interest', there is a huge fall in support; only 11% of authors would
'always' find this suitable for their Open Access articles. Similarly
the number of supporters for an 'accelerated peer review [process] with
fewer rounds of revision' shrinks, with only 9% of respondents 'always'
accepting this method. And lastly, only 7% of respondents would 'always'
find 'post-publication peer review after a basic check by invited
reviewers' appropriate. In fact, more than a quarter of authors would
'never' value 'post-publication peer review'; contrastingly, the number
of those who answered 'never' to traditional peer review was too small
to plot on the chart. 

 

 

 

 

Regional and Subject Differences

Across all subjects and regions, the majority of authors felt that
rigorous peer review would be the most suitable refereeing style for the
bulk of their OA research papers (selecting 'always' or 'often').
Authors from Library and Information Science seem least wedded to the
traditional style of peer review but even here 72% of authors said they
would 'always' or 'often' find this rigorous peer review suitable for
their OA articles. 

Peer review in the style of PLoS One, which 'reviews the technical
soundness of my research without any judgement on its novelty or
interest', is the second most popular type of review for most subject
areas, finding the largest level of support from Library and Information
Scientists (50% choosing 'always' or 'often').  

'Accelerated peer review [process] with fewer rounds of revision in (the
style of eLIfe)' was the second most popular form of peer review in
seven subject areas, most notably Business and Economics where 41% of
respondents chose 'always' or 'often' for this option. 

 'Post-publication peer review' in the style of f1000 Research found
most favour from authors in Chemistry and Materials Science, where it
saw a similar level of support as the other two types of alternative
peer review models (33-37% selecting 'always' or 'often').

Authors from Asia, the Middle East and Africa were slightly more
supportive of all the alternative forms of peer review but only those
from the Middle East and Asia showed a corresponding decrease in support
for rigorous peer review.  However, this still came out as the most
popular type of review in both of these regions. 

This press release is accompanied by Supplement 5 to the original report
- which examines the subject, regional and country-level variations for
each question regarding peer review in full:

www.tandf.co.uk/journals/explore/open-access-survey-supp5.pdf
<http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/explore/open-access-survey-supp5.pdf> 

You can find the basic results, the full survey and all the subject and
regional data supplements at our OA survey homepage:

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/openaccess/opensurvey
<http://www.tandfonline.com/page/openaccess/opensurvey> 

Follow us on Twitter for the latest news on the survey @TandFOpen
(#oasurvey).

Visit our newsroom at: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/press-releases

For more information, please contact:
Victoria Wright, Communications Manager, Taylor & Francis Group Journals
email: victoria.wright at tandf.co.uk

 

**********************

About Taylor & Francis Group

Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies,
universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life. As one
of the world's leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks
and reference works our content spans all areas of Humanities, Social
Sciences, Behavioural Sciences, Science, and Technology and Medicine. 

>From our network of offices in Oxford, New York, Philadelphia, Boca
Raton, Boston, Melbourne, Singapore, Beijing, Tokyo, Stockholm, New
Delhi and Johannesburg, Taylor & Francis staff provide local expertise
and support to our editors, societies and authors and tailored,
efficient customer service to our library colleagues.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The information contained in this email message may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorised and prohibited. Although this message and any attachments are believed to be free of viruses, no responsibility is accepted by Informa for any loss or damage arising in any way from receipt or use thereof.  Messages to and from the company are monitored for operational reasons and in accordance with lawful business practices. 
If you have received this message in error, please notify us by return and delete the message and any attachments.  Further enquiries/returns can be sent to postmaster at informa.com

Taylor & Francis Group is a trading name of Informa UK Limited, registered in England under no. 1072954



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20130503/56af8677/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 54362 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
Url : http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20130503/56af8677/attachment-0001.jpe