57
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Editorial behaviors in peer review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Editors play a critical role in the peer review system. How do editorial behaviors affect the performance of peer review? No quantitative model to date allows us to measure the influence of editorial behaviors on different peer review stages such as, manuscript distribution and final decision making. Here, we propose an agent-based model in which the process of peer review is guided mainly by the social interactions among three kinds of agents representing authors, editors and reviewers respectively. We apply this model to analyze a number of editorial behaviors such as decision strategy, number of reviewers and editorial bias on peer review. We find out that peer review outcomes are significantly sensitive to different editorial behaviors. With a small fraction (10 %) of biased editors, the quality of accepted papers declines 11 %, which indicates that effects of editorial biased behavior is worse than that of biased reviewers (7 %). While several peer review models exist, this is the first account for the study of editorial behaviors that is validated on the basis of simulation analysis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Bias in peer review

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Scientific peer review

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The ups and downs of peer review.

              This article traces the history of peer review of scientific publications, plotting the development of the process from its inception to its present-day application. We discuss the merits of peer review and its weaknesses, both perceived and real, as well as the practicalities of several major proposed changes to the system. It is our hope that readers will gain a better appreciation of the complexities of the process and, when serving as reviewers themselves, will do so in a manner that will enhance the utility of the exercise. We also propose the development of an international on-line training program for accreditation of potential referees.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ehome.wang@outlook.com
                xjkong@ieee.org
                junezhang8900@gmail.com
                zhenchentl@outlook.com
                f.xia@ieee.org
                xianwenwang@dlut.edu.cn
                Journal
                Springerplus
                Springerplus
                SpringerPlus
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                2193-1801
                27 June 2016
                27 June 2016
                2016
                : 5
                : 1
                : 903
                Affiliations
                [ ]School of Software, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, 116621 China
                [ ]WISE Lab, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, 116085 China
                Article
                2601
                10.1186/s40064-016-2601-y
                4923013
                27386349
                341dac93-1f9b-43d9-9d3c-70f3f3bd940f
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                : 24 August 2015
                : 16 June 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001809, National Natural Science Foundation of China (CN);
                Award ID: 61203165
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
                Award ID: DUT15QY06
                Award ID: DUT15YQ112
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Uncategorized
                referee,editor,agent-based model
                Uncategorized
                referee, editor, agent-based model

                Comments

                Comment on this article