Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e26895. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0026895. Epub 2011 Nov 9.

Cooperation between referees and authors increases peer review accuracy.

Author information

1
Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America. jleek@jhsph.edu

Abstract

Peer review is fundamentally a cooperative process between scientists in a community who agree to review each other's work in an unbiased fashion. Peer review is the foundation for decisions concerning publication in journals, awarding of grants, and academic promotion. Here we perform a laboratory study of open and closed peer review based on an online game. We show that when reviewer behavior was made public under open review, reviewers were rewarded for refereeing and formed significantly more cooperative interactions (13% increase in cooperation, Pā€Š=ā€Š0.018). We also show that referees and authors who participated in cooperative interactions had an 11% higher reviewing accuracy rate (Pā€Š=ā€Š0.016). Our results suggest that increasing cooperation in the peer review process can lead to a decreased risk of reviewing errors.

PMID:
22096506
PMCID:
PMC3212530
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0026895
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Public Library of Science Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center