我要吃瓜

Citation

Butchard D, Rowberry S, Squires C & Tasker G (2016) Peer Review in Practice. 我要吃瓜. http://peerreviewproject.uk/peer-review-in-practice/

Abstract
The report considers the diverse range of practices that constitute peer review in both publishing and institutional structures, examining the history of peer review, and evaluating how innovative alternative models aim to resolve pressures on the current system. It does so with a particular focus on peer review in the Arts and Humanities (in connection with the AHRC Academic Book of the Future project), while looking at wider disciplinary and publishing considerations. Peer review is an expansive topic, and our research has revealed a number of fruitful avenues for future evaluation which we have not been able to cover in detail here. These include the selection and crediting of reviewers, the role of peer review in creative practice, the advent of paid review platforms, and the use of metrics as an alternative means of quantifying research value and impact. In particular, our discussion of peer review for publications emphasises practice in scholarly journals, as that is largely where discussion in scholarly and other literature focuses. However, further primary investigation might consider equivalent issues in the field of monograph publishing.

Keywords
peer review; scholarly publishing; monograph publishing; journal publishing; monographs

• Peer Review in Practice Beta Version.pdf