The Pioneering Role of Sci in Post Publication Public Peer Review (P4R)

Ahmad Yaman Abdin,Claus Jacob,Muhammad Jawad Nasim,Yannick Ney

doi:10.3390/publications9010013

Abstract

Scientists observe, discover, justify and eventually share their findings with the scientific community. Dissemination is an integral aspect of scientific discovery, since discoveries which go unnoticed have no or little impact on science. Today, peer review is part of this process of scientific dissemination as it contributes proactively to the quality of a scientific article. As the numbers of scientific journals and scientific articles published therein are increasing steadily, processes such as the single-blind or double-blind peer review are facing a near collapse situation. In fact, these traditional forms of reviewing have reached their limits and, because of this, are also increasingly considered as unfair, sloppy, superficial and even biased. In this manuscript, we propose forms of post-publication public peer review (P4R) as valuable alternatives to the traditional blind peer review system. We describe how the journal Sci has explored such an approach and provide first empirical evidence of the benefits and also challenges, such a P4R approach faces.

Highlights

Modern theories of science describe the scientific process of discovery as a human endeavor, similar to other human activities, such as cooking or painting
The introduction of online and open access publishing at the turn of the millennium has resulted in a rapid increase in the number of journals and articles published
Since it fosters communication of science and between scientists, it has pushed the traditional peer review system to its limits, raising several concerns linked to openness and fairness

Summary

Introduction

Modern theories of science describe the scientific process of discovery as a human endeavor, similar to other human activities, such as cooking or painting. Rather than inching closer and closer to such hidden treasures already present in nature, scientists are busy constructing nature for us, in a pursuit amenable to human senses and concepts Such a constructivist approach brings together the processes of discovery, justification, and notably, dissemination. Peer review serves as an effective tool to safeguard against low quality and fraud, yet it needs to be open and fair, as any overly restrictive or biased approach may suppress and damage good science and deprive it of its food and art necessary to blossom In this manuscript, we shall describe our experiences as editors, authors and reviewers with post-publication public peer review (P4R) as implemented in the MDPI open access journal Sci (ISSN 2413-4155) [7,8,9,10].

A Brief Look at the History of Modern Scientific Publishing

The Traditional Peer Review System

Alternative Ways of Publishing

Conclusions