Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.

<h4>Background</h4>Ratings in journal peer review can be affected by sources of bias. The bias variable investigated here was the information on whether authors had suggested a possible reviewer for their manuscript, and whether the editor had taken up that suggestion or had chosen a rev...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Lutz Bornmann, Hans-Dieter Daniel
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2010
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/eb8d80bd5d314485804a9db1cfb31074
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:eb8d80bd5d314485804a9db1cfb31074
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:eb8d80bd5d314485804a9db1cfb310742021-11-18T07:03:19ZDo author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0013345https://doaj.org/article/eb8d80bd5d314485804a9db1cfb310742010-10-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/20976226/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Background</h4>Ratings in journal peer review can be affected by sources of bias. The bias variable investigated here was the information on whether authors had suggested a possible reviewer for their manuscript, and whether the editor had taken up that suggestion or had chosen a reviewer that had not been suggested by the authors. Studies have shown that author-suggested reviewers rate manuscripts more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers do.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>Reviewers' ratings on three evaluation criteria and the reviewers' final publication recommendations were available for 552 manuscripts (in total 1145 reviews) that were submitted to Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, an interactive open access journal using public peer review (authors' and reviewers' comments are publicly exchanged). Public peer review is supposed to bring a new openness to the reviewing process that will enhance its objectivity. In the statistical analysis the quality of a manuscript was controlled for to prevent favorable reviewers' ratings from being attributable to quality instead of to the bias variable.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>Our results agree with those from other studies that editor-suggested reviewers rated manuscripts between 30% and 42% less favorably than author-suggested reviewers. Against this backdrop journal editors should consider either doing without the use of author-suggested reviewers or, if they are used, bringing in more than one editor-suggested reviewer for the review process (so that the review by author-suggested reviewers can be put in perspective).Lutz BornmannHans-Dieter DanielPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 5, Iss 10, p e13345 (2010)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Lutz Bornmann Hans-Dieter Daniel Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.
description	<h4>Background</h4>Ratings in journal peer review can be affected by sources of bias. The bias variable investigated here was the information on whether authors had suggested a possible reviewer for their manuscript, and whether the editor had taken up that suggestion or had chosen a reviewer that had not been suggested by the authors. Studies have shown that author-suggested reviewers rate manuscripts more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers do.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>Reviewers' ratings on three evaluation criteria and the reviewers' final publication recommendations were available for 552 manuscripts (in total 1145 reviews) that were submitted to Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, an interactive open access journal using public peer review (authors' and reviewers' comments are publicly exchanged). Public peer review is supposed to bring a new openness to the reviewing process that will enhance its objectivity. In the statistical analysis the quality of a manuscript was controlled for to prevent favorable reviewers' ratings from being attributable to quality instead of to the bias variable.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>Our results agree with those from other studies that editor-suggested reviewers rated manuscripts between 30% and 42% less favorably than author-suggested reviewers. Against this backdrop journal editors should consider either doing without the use of author-suggested reviewers or, if they are used, bringing in more than one editor-suggested reviewer for the review process (so that the review by author-suggested reviewers can be put in perspective).
format	article
author	Lutz Bornmann Hans-Dieter Daniel
author_facet	Lutz Bornmann Hans-Dieter Daniel
author_sort	Lutz Bornmann
title	Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.
title_short	Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.
title_full	Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.
title_fullStr	Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.
title_full_unstemmed	Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.
title_sort	do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? a study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2010
url	https://doaj.org/article/eb8d80bd5d314485804a9db1cfb31074
work_keys_str_mv	AT lutzbornmann doauthorsuggestedreviewersratesubmissionsmorefavorablythaneditorsuggestedreviewersastudyonatmosphericchemistryandphysics AT hansdieterdaniel doauthorsuggestedreviewersratesubmissionsmorefavorablythaneditorsuggestedreviewersastudyonatmosphericchemistryandphysics
_version_	1718424013648166912

Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physics.

Ejemplares similares