[Video] Open Peer Review

I have been experiencing systematic biases among referees since I started my career publishing in scientific journals. I understand that any evaluation is subjective, but with the growth of the publishing market, there is more and more evidence of bias against Asians, specifically Chinese researchers, female applicants, and African and Hispanic researchers in article and grant reviews. The biased editorial process and funding processes in some countries exist in an unprecedented way. For example, some weeks ago, one of my papers got accepted with a major modification request. One of the reviewers asked to review his own work and insisted on reviewing outdated articles (before 2013) of a large scientific organization to receive inappropriate group citations. The reviewer explicitly belittled our work because we used a research methodology they were not familiar with. I contacted the editor and informed him about this unprecedented bias. In most cases, editors do not take responsibility for their decisions and are not accountable for the quality of the advice on which those decisions are based.

In my opinion, if the paper was reviewed openly, we all found to suffer less from the arbitrary behavior of referees who cannot be held accountable by the authors for unfair comments.

OPR is imperfect and does not mean that all bias will be eradicated or that senior researchers will not retaliate if younger researchers criticize their work. It will, however, make such occurrences more open and can lead to reviewers' reputations being damaged when they act inappropriately.

Watch and share 🔂 the video on Open Peer Review. The 📽️ video is available here: https://lnkd.in/eST_GC7h

1. Introduction to OPR 0:36
2. Benefits of OPR 02:13
3. How to become a reviewer 04:48
4. Take Away 06:21

Subscribe to my 📰 newsletter: www.shadyattia.org

This video is part of a playlist on Open Science: https://lnkd.in/e7NWs5hZ

Look at my ☑️ recent posts' activities. https://lnkd.in/eR-jiXtR

#accountability#peereview#editor#reviewer#unequalpowerrelationships#scientificintegrity