Blinded peer review has been the most common method that has been used for a long time as a review mechanism. This conventional method is well-known for maintaining the anonymity of reviewers, enabling them to provide critical reviews without any fear of repercussions. With time, however, some researchers argued that blinded peer review could lead to overly critical reviews that lack detail and accountability. This led to the introduction of open peer review management.

Open peer review is not an entirely new concept. An article by Technical illustrates that open peer review has been around since the 1980s, and journal societies, including the British Medical Journal, have already used this process. However, it has gained popularity because it is believed to enhance transparency and increase accountability by making the reviewers’ reports public and also giving reviewers due credit for their inputs. Although there are reservations surrounding the quality of peer review, based on plenty of research conducted to understand quality, it is stated that open peer review is more suitable for reviews that are longer and for adding comments on the methodology.

Looking at the increasing popularity of the open peer review process, this article aims to put forth some of its advantages and best practices compared to the traditional peer review management process.

Better Transparency

Unlike the blinded peer review management process, there is openness between the author and the reviewer in the open peer review process. This leads to greater transparency.

Time Efficiency

Compared with the traditional peer review process, open peer review is a time-efficient process. The traditional peer review process sometimes takes even up to a year for review. However, in the open peer review, manuscripts are made available via preprint servers. This enables broad participation through open platforms, along with reduction in time.

Greater Accountability

Despite having been employed for a long time, the blinded peer review method is associated with several drawbacks, including plagiarism. On the other hand, the open review management makes the identification of inconsistencies a lot easier. Several open review management platforms also provide open discussion and feedback mechanisms that are backed by authentic research.

Recognition and Credits

Blind peer reviewers are often unrecognized regardless of their time and efforts. On the other hand, open peer review allows the reviewers to claim their share to fame.

Conclusion

With openness and transparency, the open peer review has gained great popularity in the past few years. Open peer review methods are gaining ground and being accepted by a number of journals. However, despite its growing popularity, the open peer review is yet to be embraced by all publishers.

The open peer review is highly favored for its transparency and has the potential to increase communication, professionalism, fairness, and accountability and it is only reasonable to anticipate that the open peer review management process will gain more popularity and acceptance.

Are you searching for Peer Review Management Services? We would be delighted to help you. Nova Techset is a leading e-publishing solutions provider and we offer a wide range of solutions, including Peer Review Management Services. Please visit our website www.novatechset.com for more information.