76: Open peer review

Episode 76 · January 21st, 2019 · 48 mins 8 secs

About this Episode

Peer review is typically conducted behind closed doors. There's been a recent push to make open peer review standard, but what's often left out of these conversations are the potential downsides. To illustrate this, Dan and James discuss a recent instance of open peer review that led to considerable online debate.

Here's what they cover...

  • How should we navigate the open review of preprints?
  • Gate keepers gonna gate keep, but is this better out in the open?
  • Weaponising openness
  • Some people don't realise that some data can’t be shared
  • Should the reviewers of rejected papers follow them to the next journal?
  • When bad papers that you reject pop up in another journal, unchanged
  • Does the venue and timing of the open peer review matter?
  • Signing your reviews
  • Using publons to track your reviews


Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

  • $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show
  • $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)
Support Everything Hertz

Episode Comments