Key data

HSS
3 e The process of peer review
Q49
Editors
Process of Peer Review
Editors only
The following questions are Process about the of data Peer authors Review gather and use during their research
(e.g. experimental results, data tables, transcripts, videos
only
etc.).
3E
3E
Q49
Q49
The following questions are about the data authors gather and use during their research (e.g. experimental
results,
The following
data tables,
questions
transcripts,
are about
videos
the data
etc.).
authors gather and use during their research (e.g. experimental
results, data tables, transcripts, videos etc.).
Please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
Please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of
Please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
the following statements 1 – strongly disagree to 10 – strongly agree
Humanities and Social 0% Science 20% Researchers 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
It is unrealistic to expect peer reviewers to review
18% 14% 14% 12% 9% 11% 6% 6% 7%
It is unrealistic
authors'
to expect
data
peer
[n =
reviewers
835]
to review
18% 14% 14% 12% 9% 11% 6% 6% 7%
authors' data [n = 835]
Peer review of authors' data is desirable in principle
Peer review of authors'
[n =
data
847]
is desirable in principle
[n = 847]
1 – strongly disagree to 10 – strongly agree
Humanities and Social Science Researchers
18%
8%
16%
13%
11%
15%
6% 6%
It is unrealistic to expect authors to make available
13% 10% 13% 10% 9% 13% 5% 9% 8% 11%
It is unrealistic
their data
to
for
expect
peer
authors
review
to
[n
make
= 845]
available
13% 10% 13% 10% 9% 13% 5% 9% 8% 11%
their data for peer review [n = 845]
We have introduced, or have a plan in place to
introduce, peer review of author's data at our
15% 6% 9% 16%
41%
We have introduced, or have a plan in place to
introduce, peer
journal
review
[n
of
=
author's
799]
data at our
15% 6% 9% 16%
41%
journal [n = 799]
10 - strongly agree 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - strongly disagree
18%
8%
16%
13%
11%
15%
6% 6%
10 - strongly agree 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - strongly disagree
4 e Different models of peer review
4E
Alternatives
Q50 4E As an author: which of Alternatives the following types of peer review
have your papers undergone? Please tick all that apply
Q50
Q50
As an author: which of the following types of peer review have your papers undergone? Please tick all that
apply: As an author: which of the following types of peer review have your papers undergone? Please tick all that
apply:
Humanities and Social Science Researchers
Humanities and Social Science Researchers
95%
95%
55%
55%
24%
24%
6%
4%
6%
4%
Double blind
Double [n = 790] blind
Single blind
Single [n = 460] blind
Open
[n Open = 199]
Open and published
Open [n and = published 51]
Post-publication
Post-publication [n = 35]
[n = 790]
[n = 460]
[n = 199]
[n = 51]
[n = 35]
Editors
Editors only
only
HSS
STM
Scientific, Technical and 0% Medical 20% Researchers 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Peer review of authors' data is desirable in principle
21% 10% 15% 14% 9% 16% 6%
Peer review of authors'
[n =
data
439]
is desirable in principle
21% 10% 15% 14% 9% 16% 6%
[n = 439]
It is unrealistic to expect peer reviewers to review
It is unrealistic
authors'
to expect
data
peer
[n =
reviewers
439]
to review
authors' data [n = 439]
Scientific, Technical and Medical Researchers
15%
11%
16%
10%
8%
14%
5% 6%
It is unrealistic to expect authors to make available
10% 8% 11% 15% 8% 13% 6% 9% 10% 12%
It is unrealistic
their data
to
for
expect
peer
authors
review
to
[n
make
= 440]
available
10% 8% 11% 15% 8% 13% 6% 9% 10% 12%
their data for peer review [n = 440]
We have introduced, or have a plan in place to
introduce, peer review of author's data at our
20% 9% 13% 25%
We have introduced, or have a plan in place to
introduce, peer
journal
review
[n
of
=
author's
427]
data at our
20% 9% 13% 25%
journal [n = 427]
10 - strongly agree 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - strongly disagree
15%
11%
16%
10%
8%
14%
5% 6%
10 - strongly agree 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - strongly disagree
83%
83%
Single blind
Single [n = 348] blind
[n = 348]
Scientific, Technical and Medical Researchers
Scientific, Technical and Medical Researchers
61%
61%
27%
27%
12%
12%
Double blind
Open Open and published
Double [n = 254] blind [n Open = 113] Open [n and = published 49]
[n = 254]
[n = 113]
[n = 49]
7%
7%
Post-publication
Post-publication [n = 31]
[n = 31]
STM
40
2015 Taylor & Francis Peer Review Survey – Top Level Results – INTERNAL REPORT C Will Frass 66
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 66
DIFFERENT MODELS 41