Open peer review provides checks and balances on research integrity
Our peer review process is fully open and takes place after an article has been published. Our model uses open identities, open reports, and an open user commenting system. This means the whole process is fully transparent to researchers, policymakers, and the general public.
We encourage our authors to suggest 5 potential reviewers for their paper. Our editorial team checks all suggested reviewers for potential conflicts of interest before inviting them to assess an article.
Reviewer names and affiliations are published alongside the article meaning that all reviewers are publicly accountable for their feedback. This can trigger reviewers to produce higher quality, more constructive peer review reports. “Some of the highest quality and most useful reviews I’ve had on any papers anywhere were on papers published at F1000Research. Not free of criticism of the work! But I know I at least write more thoughtfully as a reviewer when I will be signing my name,” says Kevin J. Black, a Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Washington School of Medicine.
Open identities also ensure all reviewers will receive credit for their contributions. This aspect of open peer review is very important for cases of co-reviewing which often involves early-career researchers. Plus, it can help prevent ghostwriting of peer review reports.
Peer review reports are also published alongside the article for anyone to read. This way, readers can better understand the logic and thinking process of reviewers. Open reports also give context to why a paper might be controversial or why there are conflicting views.
Open user commenting
We operate an open user commenting system at any stage of the peer review process of an article. This system makes peer review a more constructive, collaborative conversation within the research community by allowing:
- Readers to leave feedback without being a part of the formal review process
- A greater degree of transparent communication between authors and reviewers
- Authors respond to a reviewer’s peer review report
Upholding research integrity is more important than ever. At F1000, we want to ensure that all published articles meet the highest standards of academic rigor. We believe that the key principles of open research put authors and publishers in the best position to safeguard research integrity.