Recommendations for accelerating open preprint peer review to improve the culture of science

Recommendations for accelerating open preprint peer review to improve the culture of science

Avissar-Whiting, Michele (Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Cambridge)
Belliard, F. (TU Delft Scholarly Communications and Publishing)
Bertozzi, Stafano M. (University of California Berkeley)
Brand, Amy (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Brown, Katherine (The Company of Biologists, Cambridge)
Clément-Stoneham, Géraldine (UKRI, London)
Dawson, Staphanie (ScienceOpen, Berlin)
Dey, Gautam (European Molecular Biology Laboratory Heidelberg)
Ecer, Daniel (Sciety/eLife, Cambridge)

2024

AUPeer: Plea reviewsecoisnfianrmthimportant atallheadi part nglof evethelsarere scientific presenteprocess, dcorrectbut ly: traditional peer review at journals is coming under increased scrutiny for its inefficiency and lack of transparency. As preprints become more widely used and accepted, they raise the possibility of rethinking the peer-review process. Preprints are enabling new forms of peer review that have the potential to be more thorough, inclusive, and collegial than traditional journal peer review, and to thus fundamentally shift the culture of peer review toward constructive collaboration. In this Consensus View, we make a call to action to stakeholders in the community to accelerate the growing momentum of preprint sharing and provide recommendations to empower researchers to provide open and constructive peer review for preprints.

http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:7a7c041f-a807-4ba5-9535-206bf6615500

10.1371/journal.pbio,3002502

1553-734X

PLoS Computational Biology (Print), 22 (2)

Institutional Repository

journal article

© 2024 Michele Avissar-Whiting, F. Belliard, Stafano M. Bertozzi, Amy Brand, Katherine Brown, Géraldine Clément-Stoneham, Staphanie Dawson, Gautam Dey, Daniel Ecer, More Authors