The present and future of peer review: Ideas, interventions, and evidence
Abstract
What is wrong with the peer review system? Is peer review sustainable? Useful? What other models exist? These are central yet contentious questions in today’s academic discourse. This perspective critically discusses alternative models and revisions to the peer review system. The authors highlight possible changes to the peer review system, with the goal of fostering further dialog among the main stakeholders, including producers and consumers of scientific research. Neither our list of identified issues with the peer review system nor our discussed resolutions are complete. A point of agreement is that fair assessment and efficient change would require more comprehensive and rigorous data on the various aspects of the peer review system.
Article Details
Journal Info
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
National Academy of Sciences
Authors (13)
Balazs Aczel
Ann-Sophie Barwich
Department of History and Philosophy of Science and Medicine, Indiana University
Amanda B. Diekman
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University
Ayelet Fishbach
Booth School of Business
Robert L. Goldstone
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University
Pablo Gomez
Psychology Department, Skidmore College
Odd Erik Gundersen
Department of Computer Science
Paul T. von Hippel
LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas
Alex O. Holcombe
School of Psychology, University of Sydney
Stephan Lewandowsky
School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol
Nazbanou Nozari
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University
Franco Pestilli
Department of Psychology
John P. A. Ioannidis
Department of Medicine