Peer Review

Peer review an overview 

Reviewers play a significant role in publishing the scholars and the articles. It highlights the pros and cons and can help in improving. Peer review is a process of quality control and evaluating suitability for publication. It mainly exists to validate academic work. However, after all the tools and updates might have come, peer review is still a widely accepted method for research validation. It has continued successfully with more updates and some minor changes from so long. Peer review helps to improve the quality of published research, and increases networking possibilities within research communities. Within the scientific community, it is one of the essential components in academic writing process. 

Peer review & history 

We at Haridra, believe that the peer review process will maintain quality and validity of articles and the journals. No fraud or delay will be blamed to any individual articles. Peer review is being used since ancient Greece according to the researchers. It is believed that the peer review has been a formal part of scientific communication since the first scientific journals appeared more than 300 years ago. The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society is thought to be the first journal to formalize the peer review process under the editorship of Henry Oldenburg (1618- 1677).

It is said that peer review cannot completely eliminate cases of fraud but it certainly improves the quality of publications. Moreover, if the author takes the full responsibility, the concept can be adapted to counter criticism. Despite many criticisms about the integrity of peer review, many publishers and scholars believe that peer review is one of the best forms of scientific evaluation.

Furthermore, a 2015 survey by the publishing research group, saw 82 percent of researchers agreeing that “without peer review there is no control in scientific communication.”

Types of peer review

Peer review comes in different traits. It is important to check which variant suits the article and why. You need to be aware of all the respective rules, advantages and disadvantages. Often one type of review will be preferred by a subject community but there is an increasing call towards more transparency around the peer review process. You should consult the journal’s homepage or contact the editorial office for any questions regarding the peer review model. 

Single anonymized review

In this type of review, the traditional way is being followed. The name of the reviewer is hidden from the author so as to maintain a fair and honest reviewing. It is the most common type of open review.  

There are still some points to consider regarding single anonymized review – 

  • Reviewer anonymity will ensure impartial decisions from both the sides.
  • The main demerit is that the Authors may be concerned about the delay in publication or any problem. 
  • Reviewers may use their anonymity as justification for being unnecessarily critical or harsh when commenting on the authors’ work.

Double anonymized review

In Double Anonymized Review model, both the reviewer and the author are anonymous. This limits the biasness from the reviewer side. 

  • The author’s gender, country of origin, academic status or previous publication history is hidden which will not come in way. 
  • Articles are considered on the basis of the content of their papers, rather than their reputation.

But in this type of open review also, the reviewer can identify the author by the writing style, subject matter or self-citation. There is no to less guarantee of totals anonymity as the reviewer can identity the author with the experience and past work. 

Triple anonymized review

The reviewer’s identity and the author’s identity are anonymous and are kept unknown from both the ends. Both the reviewers and the editor are unknown to each other. This review is helpful in minimizing any potential disputes of biasness towards the author. Articles are anonymized at the submission stage as well. 

However, in triple anonymized review there are less complexities which can be handled easily. Moreover, with the double anonymized review, the editor or the reviewers can understand the writing style and can figure out the author’s identity. The reviewer can identify the style, subject matter, citation patterns and other methodologies. 

Open review

Open review is a review mechanism in which both the reviewer and author are known to each other at any point during the review process. It is an emerging practice aiming great transparency and reliability. It is continuously evolving and works during and after the peer review process.

Other types of open peer review consist of:

  • Open Identities – publication of reviewers’ names are identified.
  • Open Reports – publication of reports with the article, whether signed or anonymous.
  • Open Commenting – publication of peer review reports with authors’ and editors’ responses with the article.
  • Open Platform – publication of the paper dually checked. Further, opening a discussion forum to the community who can comment. 

According to surveys, Open peer review is considered the best way for protection against malicious comments and plagiarism. Also, it helps to encourage honest and open reviewing. An open review is sometimes misguided with the less honest process which may restrict the reviewer to withhold or tone down the criticism. Furthermore, in order to provide updates and feedback to reviewers,

Haridra informs reviewers about the editors decision and their peers’ recommendations. Moreover, transparency is important in peer review, it builds the trust and honesty.

Haridra follow policy of Blind / Double blind peer review process.