The Stockholm University Press Blog celebrates #peerrevwk17 by looking back at our earlier interviews about Peer Review. The idea is to inspire dreams and visions that focus on possibilities and opportunities to improve the process to the benefit of researchers and their work.
We need though to discuss more on what is meant with a ”well done peer review”
“Personally I have always seen double-blind peer-reviewing as the way to go to ensure complete honesty from reviewers who may be faced with the need to write an unfavourable review”
A research driven publisher should give recognition for review part 1
A research driven publisher should give recognition for review part 2
The threat is that the core of the publishing process is invisible and never recognised at any level
Dreams and visions about the peer review process: part 1, part 2, part 3.