Cargando…

Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals

BACKGROUND: There is concern in the academic publishing community that it is becoming more difficult to secure reviews for peer-reviewed manuscripts, but much of this concern stems from anecdotal and rhetorical evidence. METHODS: We examined the proportion of review requests that led to a completed...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Albert, Arianne Y. K., Gow, Jennifer L., Cobra, Alison, Vines, Timothy H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5803631/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29451554
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0022-7
_version_ 1783298691007774720
author Albert, Arianne Y. K.
Gow, Jennifer L.
Cobra, Alison
Vines, Timothy H.
author_facet Albert, Arianne Y. K.
Gow, Jennifer L.
Cobra, Alison
Vines, Timothy H.
author_sort Albert, Arianne Y. K.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is concern in the academic publishing community that it is becoming more difficult to secure reviews for peer-reviewed manuscripts, but much of this concern stems from anecdotal and rhetorical evidence. METHODS: We examined the proportion of review requests that led to a completed review over a 6-year period (2009–2015) in a mid-tier biology journal (Molecular Ecology). We also re-analyzed previously published data from four other mid-tier ecology journals (Functional Ecology, Journal of Ecology, Journal of Animal Ecology, and Journal of Applied Ecology), looking at the same proportion over the period 2003 to 2010. RESULTS: The data from Molecular Ecology showed no significant decrease through time in the proportion of requests that led to a review (proportion in 2009 = 0.47 (95 % CI = 0.43 to 0.52), proportion in 2015 = 0.44 (95 % CI = 0.40 to 0.48)). This proportion did decrease for three of the other ecology journals (changes in proportions from 2003 to 2010 = −0.10, −0.18, and −0.09), while the proportion for the fourth (Functional Ecology) stayed roughly constant (change in proportion = −0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our data suggest that reviewer agreement rates have probably declined slightly but not to the extent suggested by the anecdotal and rhetorical evidence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5803631
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58036312018-02-15 Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals Albert, Arianne Y. K. Gow, Jennifer L. Cobra, Alison Vines, Timothy H. Res Integr Peer Rev Research BACKGROUND: There is concern in the academic publishing community that it is becoming more difficult to secure reviews for peer-reviewed manuscripts, but much of this concern stems from anecdotal and rhetorical evidence. METHODS: We examined the proportion of review requests that led to a completed review over a 6-year period (2009–2015) in a mid-tier biology journal (Molecular Ecology). We also re-analyzed previously published data from four other mid-tier ecology journals (Functional Ecology, Journal of Ecology, Journal of Animal Ecology, and Journal of Applied Ecology), looking at the same proportion over the period 2003 to 2010. RESULTS: The data from Molecular Ecology showed no significant decrease through time in the proportion of requests that led to a review (proportion in 2009 = 0.47 (95 % CI = 0.43 to 0.52), proportion in 2015 = 0.44 (95 % CI = 0.40 to 0.48)). This proportion did decrease for three of the other ecology journals (changes in proportions from 2003 to 2010 = −0.10, −0.18, and −0.09), while the proportion for the fourth (Functional Ecology) stayed roughly constant (change in proportion = −0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our data suggest that reviewer agreement rates have probably declined slightly but not to the extent suggested by the anecdotal and rhetorical evidence. BioMed Central 2016-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5803631/ /pubmed/29451554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0022-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Albert, Arianne Y. K.
Gow, Jennifer L.
Cobra, Alison
Vines, Timothy H.
Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals
title Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals
title_full Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals
title_fullStr Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals
title_full_unstemmed Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals
title_short Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals
title_sort is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? a test with data from five ecology journals
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5803631/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29451554
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0022-7
work_keys_str_mv AT albertarianneyk isitbecominghardertosecurereviewersforpeerreviewatestwithdatafromfiveecologyjournals
AT gowjenniferl isitbecominghardertosecurereviewersforpeerreviewatestwithdatafromfiveecologyjournals
AT cobraalison isitbecominghardertosecurereviewersforpeerreviewatestwithdatafromfiveecologyjournals
AT vinestimothyh isitbecominghardertosecurereviewersforpeerreviewatestwithdatafromfiveecologyjournals