Open Access Peer Review... Let the Communication Commence

Our class was asked to reflect on the processes of peer review and whether or not we would try to use open access if we were the editor and chief of a journal. This was my response...

Picture retrieved from http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/128298508615001250urtheoryhasme.jpg

Peer review is important for academic literature in all fields of study. Using peer review processes justifies the authenticity of the paper and give the article a significant reputation. Universities require students to use peer review papers for research, papers that have not passed through peer review cannot be used. When a paper has been peer reviewed it means that it has undergone critical scrutiny which the author has used to make the article the best that it can be and all of the information is qualified and correct.

There are many different processes of peer review used by academic journals that are continuously improving. The first is the single blind process which is where the author and their institution is know to the peer reviewer but the author does not know who is reviewing their work. the second is call a double blind, in this process neither the author or the reviewer is aware of who the other is. The third kind of peer review is open access which is more experimental and is less common among academic journals. In open access both the author and the peers names are revealed to each other. Open access allows for communication between professionals and can make peer review more efficient and improve it quality. This uses all of the traditional methods of peer review while increasing collaboration and opening discussion within the fields community and the public. With open access people who are peer reviewing a paper can have access to more information if they need it but just asking the author. People can also look at and compare the draft of a paper with the final. Readers can gain further insights into the information and the individuality of the author with open access.

The UK parliament agrees with the open access concept admitting that this process is suitable for each academic field in different ways. Publishers and journals should make sure that their readers are confident in the journals methods of peer review. Customers continue to subscribe to journals because they trust in and feel like the journal is a reputable source of reliable information. Journals should keep readers updated and include them in important processes. With open access the public can comment on articles and give constructive criticism to authors. There has been open access failure cases where comments from the public did not meet the standards of quality peer review and there have also been successful cases.

If I was the editor and chief of an academic journal I would convince my colleges that the journal should try an open access approach to peer review. For some journals, such as Nature, open access public comment peer review has failed but that does not mean it does not work, there as also success stories. Using open access ignites discussions between authors and people that would not occur with tradition open access. The canvas for spreading knowledge con be contributed to by everyone, not just authors and the other professionals who peer review. Open access gives an article more exposure and therefore more impact. So why not at least give it a try?