Cooperation between referees and authors increases Peer review accuracy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

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, P = 0.018). We also show that referees and authors who participated in cooperative interactions had an 11% higher reviewing accuracy rate (P = 0.016). Our results suggest that increasing cooperation in the peer review process can lead to a decreased risk of reviewing errors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere26895
JournalPLoS One
Volume6
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 9 2011

Fingerprint

Peer Review
peers
cooperatives
Organized Financing
risk reduction
Publications

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Cooperation between referees and authors increases Peer review accuracy. / Leek, Jeffrey T; Taub, Margaret Anne; Pineda, Fernando J.

In: PLoS One, Vol. 6, No. 11, e26895, 09.11.2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{36505979c50443c9a509a2d531892475,
title = "Cooperation between referees and authors increases Peer review accuracy",
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, P = 0.018). We also show that referees and authors who participated in cooperative interactions had an 11{\%} higher reviewing accuracy rate (P = 0.016). Our results suggest that increasing cooperation in the peer review process can lead to a decreased risk of reviewing errors.",
author = "Leek, {Jeffrey T} and Taub, {Margaret Anne} and Pineda, {Fernando J}",
year = "2011",
month = "11",
day = "9",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0026895",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
journal = "PLoS One",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cooperation between referees and authors increases Peer review accuracy

AU - Leek, Jeffrey T

AU - Taub, Margaret Anne

AU - Pineda, Fernando J

PY - 2011/11/9

Y1 - 2011/11/9

N2 - 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, P = 0.018). We also show that referees and authors who participated in cooperative interactions had an 11% higher reviewing accuracy rate (P = 0.016). Our results suggest that increasing cooperation in the peer review process can lead to a decreased risk of reviewing errors.

AB - 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, P = 0.018). We also show that referees and authors who participated in cooperative interactions had an 11% higher reviewing accuracy rate (P = 0.016). Our results suggest that increasing cooperation in the peer review process can lead to a decreased risk of reviewing errors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80655139027&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80655139027&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0026895

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0026895

M3 - Article

C2 - 22096506

AN - SCOPUS:80655139027

VL - 6

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 11

M1 - e26895

ER -