Black box, Pandora’s box or virtual toolbox? An experiment in a journal’s transparent peer review on the web

Article English OPEN
Duncan, N. J.; Maharg, P.;

We all accept that peer review is an essential part of journal publication in all disciplines, but almost everyone is agreed that it could be improved. This article describes an experiment in peer review with a legal education journal The Law Teacher. It reports on the ... View more
  • References (38)
    38 references, page 1 of 4

    Science: Fairness and Reliability of Peer Review VCH, Weinheim, 1993. 3 See M J Mahoney 'Open exchange and epistemic progress' American Psychologist Vol 40, pp

    29 - 39, 1985. 4 See for example S Schroter, N Black, S Evans, J Carpenter, F Godlee and R Smith 'Effects of train-

    ing on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial' British Medical Journal, Vol 328, No

    7411, 2004, where the conclusion was that short training packages have only a slight impact on

    the quality of peer review. The value of longer interventions still needs to be assessed. 5 See, for instance, D Rennie 'Freedom and responsibility in medical publication: setting the

    balance right' Journal of the American Medical Association Vol 280, pp 300 - 302, 1998. 6 See for example F Godlee, C R Gale and C N Martyn 'Effect on the quality of peer review of

    Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol 280, pp 237 - 240, 1998. In this study the

    authors modified a paper accepted for publication introducing 8 areas of weakness. Reviewers

    were randomly allocated to five groups. Groups 1 and 2 received manuscripts from which the

    authors' names and affiliations had been removed, while groups 3 and 4 were aware of the

  • Metrics
Share - Bookmark