Onderstaande printversie van het indicatorenboek werd door uw browser gegenereerd, en zal niet steeds optimaal ogen. Via de ingebouwde printfunctie op de website van het Indicatorenboek (ronde knop rechts bovenaan) kan u een printvriendelijke PDF genereren met mooi ogende lay-out.

7.4.3Open Peer Review in the SSH

Open Peer Review has been called an ‘umbrella term’ (Ross-Hellauer, 2017), as it entails different types of innovations to traditional peer review. The aim of Open Peer review is to increase the transparency of the review process. Besides increased transparency, potential benefits of Open Peer Review include making it easier to find reviewers, reducing bias, increasing the quality of the review process, enabling more opportunities for discussion between reviewers and authors, and allowing the community to interact with the peer review process. Not all of these potential benefits are associated with all types of Open Peer Review, there are different varieties of Open Peer Review with different levels of transparency and community involvement. Examples of these types can be found in various SSH journals and platforms.

A recent ECOOM report on Open Peer Review (Vandewalle et al., 2022) distinguishes between seven main types of Open Peer Review:

  • Open identities: Reviewers’ and/or authors’ names are disclosed to the public.
  • Open reports: Reviewers’ reports are published alongside the article.
  • Open participation: Reviews can be “crowdsourced” from a wider audience instead of invited by editors.
  • Open interaction: Direct discussion between reviewers and authors and/or between reviewers are possible.
  • Open prereview manuscripts: Manuscripts are made immediately publicly available before the peer review process has started.
  • Open final version commenting: Commenting on a published manuscript is possible.
  • Open platforms/decoupled review: Reviews are conducted by a different agency and can be transferred to another journal along with the manuscript.