Key data

4 r DIFFERENT MODELS 33
HSS
STM
4R
4R
Q33
Different models
Alternatives
of peer review
Reviewers
Alternatives
only
As an author: suppose you could choose the method of peer review for your paper. Please rate how
comfortable you are with each of the following methods:
Q33 As an author: suppose you could choose the method of
Q33 As peer an author: review suppose for you your could 1 choose – paper. very uncomfortable the method Please of peer to 10 rate review – very how comfortable
your comfortable paper. Please rate you how
comfortable you are with each of the methods:
are with each of the following methods
Double Open blind [n = 2,505] 2,472]
Open Open and [n Published = 2,472]
[n = 2,479]
Open Post-publication
and Published
[n [n = 2,479] 2,465]
Post-publication
Single blind [n = [n 2,465] = 2,479]
1 – very uncomfortable to 10 – very comfortable
Humanities and Social Science Researchers
8% 9%
7% 8%
6% 7%
5% 6%
5% 7% 8%
8% 10% 9% 9% 7% 9% 12% 13% 8%
7% 9% 7% 7%
13% 12%
7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 9% 13% 8%
8% 8%
8% 11%
8% 17%
Single 10 - blind very [n comfortable = 2,479] 6% 9 7% 8 7% 7 7% 6 9% 5 8% 4 11% 3 213%
1 - very uncomfortable
30%
8% 9%
9% 9%
9% 13% 12%
12% 9%
9% 11% 9%
12% 11%
7% 18%
22% 18%
24% 22%
30% 24%
10 - very comfortable 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - very uncomfortable
Double Single blind [n [n = 1,516] 1,490]
Single Open blind [n [n = 1,483] 1,490]
Open Open and [n Published = 1,483]
[n = 1,480]
Open Post-publication
and Published
[n [n = 1,480] 1,477]
9%
13% 15%
11% 13%
8% 11%
6%
9% 43%
9% 9%
9% 9%
8% 9%
10% 54% 9%
11% 11%
9% 11%
9% 9%
12% 12%
10% 12% 8%
9% 10% 9% 8%
Post-publication
10 - very 8% 8% 9% 9% 9% 14% 8% 10% 9% 15%
[n =
comfortable
1,477]
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - very uncomfortable
9%
13%
19% 8%
9% 8%
9% 14%
14% 14%
12% 14% 6%
13% 12%
13% 7%
8% 7%
9%
6% 6%
6% 9%
10% 9%
8% 10% 6%
8% 8%
7% 6%
8% 9% 7%
9%
5% 12%
12%
15% 12%
15%
Reviewers
only
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Humanities and Social Science Researchers
Double blind [n = 2,505] 0% 20% 54% 40% 60% 17% 12% 80% 7% 100%
Scientific, Technical and Medical Researchers
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Scientific, Technical and Medical Researchers
Double blind [n = 1,516] 0% 20% 43% 40% 19% 60% 14% 80% 10% 5% 100%
15%
11%
12%
4 r
Different models of peer review
4R
Alternatives
Q35 4R The following questions Alternatives are about Open Peer Review, where
Q35 both the author’s and reviewers’ names are known to each other.
Please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of the
Q35
following statements 1 – strongly disagree to 10 – strongly agree
Reviewers
only
Reviewers
only
The following questions are about Open Peer Review, where both the author’s and reviewers’ names are
known to each other. Please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
The following questions are about Open Peer Review, where both the author’s and reviewers’ names are
known to each other. Please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
1 – strongly disagree to 10 – strongly agree
Humanities and Social Science Researchers
Humanities 0% and Social 20% Science 40% Researchers 60% 80% 100%
I would find it difficult to critique the 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
content of a paper, or raise any ethical
I would find it difficult to critique the
13% 7% 11% 12% 9% 10% 7% 10% 10% 11%
concerns, if the author knew my name
content of a paper, [n = 2,490] or raise any ethical
13% 7% 11% 12% 9% 10% 7% 10% 10% 11%
concerns, if the author knew my name
I would be hesitant to criticise a paper
[n = 2,490]
because of the potential impact on my
I would be hesitant to criticise a paper
12% 8% 10% 12% 9% 13% 6% 8% 9% 13%
future career
because of the [n potential = 2,485] impact on my
12% 8% 10% 12% 9% 13% 6% 8% 9% 13%
future career
I would be comfortable [n = 2,485] with the author
knowing I was the person who reviewed 10% 6% 12% 11% 8% 13% 7% 11% 8% 15%
I would be their comfortable paper [n = with 2,487] the author
knowing I was the person who reviewed 10% 6% 12% 11% 8% 13% 7% 11% 8% 15%
their paper [n = 2,487]
10 - strongly agree 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - strongly disagree
10 - strongly agree 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - strongly disagree
Scientific, Technical and Medical Researchers
Scientific, Technical 0% and 20% Medical 40% Researchers 60% 80% 100%
I would find it difficult to critique the 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
content of a paper, or raise any ethical
I would find it difficult to critique the
11% 9% 12% 11% 9% 11% 7% 10% 10% 11%
concerns, if the author knew my name
content of a paper, [n = 1,504] or raise any ethical
11% 9% 12% 11% 9% 11% 7% 10% 10% 11%
concerns, if the author knew my name
I would be comfortable [n = 1,504] with the author
knowing I was the person who reviewed 10% 7% 10% 10% 9% 15% 6% 8% 10% 13%
I would be their comfortable paper [n = with 1,506] the author
knowing I was the person who reviewed 10% 7% 10% 10% 9% 15% 6% 8% 10% 13%
their paper [n = 1,506]
I would be hesitant to criticise a paper
because of the potential impact on my 10% 6% 10% 10% 9% 15% 6% 10% 11% 14%
I would future be hesitant career to [n criticise = 1,496] a paper
because of the potential impact on my 10% 6% 10% 10% 9% 15% 6% 10% 11% 14%
future career [n = 1,496]
10 - strongly agree 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - strongly disagree
10 - strongly agree 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - strongly disagree
HSS STM
10 - very comfortable 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - very uncomfortable
2015 Taylor & Francis Peer Review Survey – Top Level Results – INTERNAL REPORT C Will Frass 44
Please note the responses from reviewers on motivations to review and training (Q36-43) are included in a later supplement.
32
PEER REVIEW IN 2015 A GLOBAL VIEW (A TAYLOR & FRANCIS WHITE PAPER)
2015 Taylor & Francis Peer Review Survey – Top Level Results – INTERNAL REPORT C Will Frass 44
2015 Taylor & Francis Peer Review Survey – Top Level Results – INTERNAL REPORT C Will Frass 45