Open Review is an umbrella term for a variety of methods that intend to open the process of (peer) review, which is the traditional way to assure quality in science. Drafted journal articles or grant applications are examined and commented by scientists from the same domain and can be either discarded, revised or accepted. However, these traditional single-blind or double-blind approaches have been criticized for lengthy and unfair publication processes.
To counteract these shortcomings Open Review emphasize transparency as well as accountability. To achieve these goals multiple methods can be employed:
- The identities of the author(s) and reviewer(s) are known to each other – Open Identities
- The reports by the reviewer(s) are published alongside the article – Open Reports
- The article is openly published and the community can comment on its content or write reports without a formal review invitation – Open Participation
One of the earliest journals to opt for an open review process was the British Medical Journal (BMJ) in 1999. Since then the uptake of open review approaches has been slow with the topic remaining controversially discussed. However, more Open Review platforms and journals have emerged.
Within the MPG some Open Review platforms and overlay journals are supported to give researches the opportunity to make use of this Open Science facet.
- Peer Review
- eLife – an independent nonprofit committed to improving the way research is reviewed and communicated
- Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP) – a not-for-profit international scientific journal dedicated to the publication and public discussion of studies investigating Earth’s atmosphere and the underlying chemical and physical processes.
- Peer Community In – a non-profit organization of researchers offering peer review, recommendation and publication of scientific articles in open access for free.
- FOSTER Open Science “Open Peer Review”: https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/node/2333
- AG Open Science “Offenes Peer Review (open peer review)”: https://ag-openscience.de/open-peer-review/
- Tony Ross-Hellauer (2017). “What is open peer review? A systematic review” [version 2; peer review: 4 approved] (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11369.2)
- Dietmar Wolfram, Peiling Wang, Adam Hembree, Hyoungjoo Park (2020). “Open peer review: promoting transparency in open science.” (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03488-4)
- Federico Bianchi, Flaminio Squazzoni (2022). “Can transparency undermine peer review? A simulation model of scientist behavior under open peer review” (https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scac027)