[GOAL] Re: Question about portability of peer review

[Charlotte Roh]

This is very interesting!

 

I can see how this policy would be helpful to a new journal in providing
quick background information for necessary editorial revisions or even
ultimate rejection or acceptance. This could also be helpful to authors
whose publications are not outstanding due to the quality of their research
but rather due to space constraints or subject appropriateness.

 

However, I wouldn't consider it acceptable as the sole decision-making
criteria unless the rejecting publisher provided the reviews directly to the
new journal in order to ensure a true blind peer review without author bias.
I would hope that the editors of the International Journal of Medical
Sciences conduct a second independent round of review.

 

Regards,

Charlotte Roh

 

Scholarly Communications Resident Librarian

W.E.B. Du Bois Library

University of Massachusetts

Amherst, MA  01003

Phone: (413)545-6872

Email: charlotteroh at library.umass.edu

 

 

 

From: goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] On Behalf
Of Beall, Jeffrey
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 11:25 AM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) (goal at eprints.org)
Subject: [GOAL] Question about portability of peer review

 

An open-access publisher has this policy <http://www.medsci.org/ms/author>
regarding peer review portability:

 

The Editors of the International Journal of Medical Sciences recognize that
many manuscripts rejected by top-tier journals are still outstanding. Our
journal is willing to review and re-evaluate manuscripts rejected from
journals such as the Nature journals, Cell Press journals, NEJM, Lancet
journals, Annals of Internal Medicine, and other high impact journals. We
encourage authors to provide a copy of previous reviewer's and editor's
comments. These reviews and rebuttals need to be dated and within 6 months
of the last submission date. It is our belief that these prior reviews may
assist us in expediting your manuscript for re-evaluation, thus facilitating
more rapid publication; in some cases, the manuscript may be accepted
immediately. Please include the prior reviews and your responses in the
covering letter when making your submission.

 

My question is this: Is peer-review portability considered acceptable when
the author is the one that transfers the actual peer review data from the
rejecting publisher to the new one (as described in the policy above)?

 

Thank you,

 

Jeffrey Beall, MA, MSLS, Associate Professor

Scholarly Initiatives Librarian
Auraria Library
University of Colorado Denver
1100 Lawrence St.
Denver, Colo.  80204 USA
(303) 534-8600
jeffrey.beall at ucdenver.edu

 

Description:
http://www.ucdenver.edu/about/departments/oiuc/brand/downloads/branddownload
s/branddocuments/Logos-E-mail%20Signatures/emailSig_2campus.png

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20140225/429f1ecb/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 4803 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20140225/429f1ecb/attachment-0001.jpe