Challenges to open peer review

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to assess what the challenges to open peer review (OPR) are, relative to traditional peer review (TPR).Design/methodology/approachBy examining select issues within peer review, more broadly, and challenges within TPR, the effectiveness of OPR is questioned.FindingsAlthough OPR brings an aspect of transparency, by partially eliminating biases, fear of reprisals and of professional blow-back, either by authors who may be criticized or by competitors, limits the expansion of this peer review model, or its adoption as an industry-wide standard.Originality/valueOpen Science 2.0 boasts of greater openness and transparency and OPR is touted as one tool to achieve this. However, that potential is limited. This limitation needs to be recognized.

• Publication year

  2019

• Venue

  Online information review (Print)

• Publication date

  2019-04-08

• Fields of study

  Medicine, Business, Computer Science

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1108/OIR-04-2018-0139
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• The ClarivateTM Analytics acquisition of Publons – an evolution or commodification of peer review?

  2019cited by this paper
• Fake peer reviews, fake identities, fake accounts, fake data: beware!

  2017cited by this paper
• Fortifying the Corrective Nature of Post-publication Peer Review: Identifying Weaknesses, Use of Journal Clubs, and Rewarding Conscientious Behavior

  2017cited by this paper
• Free editors and peers: squeezing the lemon dry

  2016cited by this paper
• What Rights Do Authors Have?

  2016cited by this paper
• Emerging trends in peer review—a survey

  2015cited by this paper
• Problems with Traditional Science Publishing and Finding a Wider Niche for Post-Publication Peer Review

  2015cited by this paper
• Multi-Stage Open Peer Review: Scientific Evaluation Integrating the Strengths of Traditional Peer Review with the Virtues of Transparency and Self-Regulation

  2012cited by this paper
• Open Peer Review by a Selected-Papers Network

  2011cited by this paper
• Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial

  2010cited by this paper

• Innovation grant (S)hopping: Unpacking SMEs' support choices between multiple potential funding sources

  2026cites this paper
• MDPI’s Article Changes, Corrections Policy, and Versions of Record: Litmus Test Using “Article Versions Notes” of the Journal Agronomy, with Practical, Ethical, and Policy Implications

  2025cites this paper
• Does the disconnect between the peer-reviewed label and reality explain the peer review crisis, and can open peer review or preprints resolve it? A narrative review

  2025cites this paper
• No reward without responsibility: Focus on peer review reports

  2025cites this paper
• Are reviewer scores consistent with citations?

  2024cites this paper
• Acknowledgments in Scientific Papers

  2023cites this paper
• Why are peer reviewers thinning out, and are there ways to enrich the peer pool?

  2023cites this paper
• For a paradigm shift in peer review, bold steps need to be taken

  2023cites this paper
• REVISÃO ABERTA POR PARES: QUANDO, POR QUE E PARA QUEM?

  2022cites this paper
• O Processo de avaliação por pares e a Ciência Aberta: um nó górdio para os periódicos na área de História?

  2022cites this paper
• Identifying the characteristics of excellent peer reviewers by using Publons

  2022cites this paper
• The Role of Publons in the Context of Open Peer Review

  2022cites this paper
• Does publication history influence the integrity of the journals: studying publication timelines and their impact on journal metrics?

  2022cites this paper
• Perceptions regarding open science appraised by editors of scholarly publications published in Spain

  2022cites this paper
• A Network based Blockchain ecosystem for peer review publication

  2021cites this paper
• How do Clarivate Analytics and Publons propose to fortify peer review in the COVID-19 era?

  2021cites this paper
• Game theory and scholarly publishing: premises for an agreement around open access

  2021cites this paper
• Classification and analysis of PubPeer comments: How a web journal club is used

  2021cites this paper
• How to Do a Peer Review?

  2021cites this paper
• Peer Review in Law Journals

  2021cites this paper
• The relationship of polarity of post-publication peer review to citation count: Evidence from Publons

  2020cites this paper
• Scheinverlage in der wissenschaftlichen Kommunikation. Verbreitung von Predatory Publishing und Lösungsansätze

  2020cites this paper
• Innovative Strategies for Peer Review

  2020cites this paper
• Skin in the Game: Personal Accountability and Journal Peer Review

  2020cites this paper
• Page Proof Instructions and Queries

  2020cites this paper
• Does open peer review improve citation count? Evidence from a propensity score matching analysis of PeerJ

  2020cites this paper
• Open Textbooks as an innovation route for open science pedagogy

  2020cites this paper
• Predatory and exploitative behaviour in academic publishing: An assessment

  2019cites this paper
• Editors Should Declare Conflicts of Interest

  2019cites this paper
• Open Access Mega-Journals: Quality, Economics and Post-publication Peer Review Infrastructure

  2019cites this paper