Journal
LEARNED PUBLISHING
Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 269-277Publisher
WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/leap.1111
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- Publishing Research Consortium
- National Social Science Foundation of China [15CTQ026]
- Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia [UM.C/HIR/MOHE/FCSIT/11]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This paper presents selected findings from the first year of a 3-year longitudinal study of early career researchers (ECRs), which sought to ascertain current and changing habits in scholarly communication. Specifically, the aims of the paper are to show: (1) how much experience and knowledge ECRs had of peer review - both as authors and as reviewers; (2) what they felt the benefits were and what suggestions they had for improvement; (3) what they thought of open peer review (OPR); and (4) who they felt should organize peer review. Data were obtained from 116 science and social science ECRs, most of whom had published and were subject to in-depth interviews conducted face-to-face, via Skype, or over the telephone. An extensive literature review was also conducted to provide a context and supplementary data for the findings. The main findings were that: (1) most ECRS are well informed about peer review and generally like the experience, largely because of the learning experiences obtained; (2) they like blind double-peer review, but would like some improvements, especially with regards to reviewer quality; (3) most are uncomfortable with the idea of OPR; and (4) most would like publishers to continue organizing peer review because of their perceived independence.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available