76: Open peer review

Peer review is typically conducted behind closed doors. There's been a recent push to make open peer review standard, but what's often left out of these conversations are the potential downsides. To illustrate this, Dan and James discuss a recent instance of open peer review that led to considerable online debate.

Here's what they cover...

• How should we navigate the open review of preprints?
• Gate keepers gonna gate keep, but is this better out in the open?
• Weaponising openness
• Some people don't realise that some data can’t be shared
• Should the reviewers of rejected papers follow them to the next journal?
• When bad papers that you reject pop up in another journal, unchanged
• Does the venue and timing of the open peer review matter?
• Signing your reviews
• Using publons to track your reviews

Links

• Brad Love’s blog post: http://bradlove.org/blog/open-review
• Niko’s blog post: https://nikokriegeskorte.org/2019/01/09/whats-the-best-measure-of-representational-dissimilarity/
• Publons: https://publons.com
• Dan on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana
• James on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers
• Everything Hertz on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
• Everything Hertz on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/

Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

• $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show
• $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)

Support Everything Hertz