“Within the academic community, peer review is widely recognized as being at the heart of scholarly research. However, faith in peer review’s integrity is of ongoing and increasing concern to many. It is imperative that publishers (and academic editors) of peer-reviewed scholarly research learn from each other, working together to improve practices in areas such as ethical issues, training, and data transparency ….
Authors, editors and reviewers all agreed that the most important motivation to publish in peer reviewed journals is making a contribution to the field and sharing research with others…
Playing a part in the academic process and improving papers are the most important motivations for reviewers…
Most researchers, across the humanities and social sciences and science, technology and medicine, rate the benefit of the peer review process towards improving their article as 8 or above out of 10…
In an ideal world, there is agreement that peer review should detect plagiarism …
Researchers thought there was a low prevalence of gender bias but higher prevalence of regional and seniority bias…
Most researchers wait between one and six months for an article they’ve written to undergo peer review, yet authors (not reviewers / editors) think up to two months is reasonable…
Learning Change 