Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (1):169-188 (2016)

A growing body of literature has identified potential problems that can compromise the quality, fairness, and integrity of journal peer review, including inadequate review, inconsistent reviewer reports, reviewer biases, and ethical transgressions by reviewers. We examine the evidence concerning these problems and discuss proposed reforms, including double-blind and open review. Regardless of the outcome of additional research or attempts at reforming the system, it is clear that editors are the linchpin of peer review, since they make decisions that have a significant impact on the process and its outcome. We consider some of the steps editors should take to promote quality, fairness and integrity in different stages of the peer review process and make some recommendations for editorial conduct and decision-making
Keywords Peer review  Quality  Fairness  Integrity  Ethics  Reliability  Bias  Editors  Publication
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11948-015-9625-5
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,316
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Responsible Conduct of Research.Adil E. Shamoo - 2009 - Oxford University Press.
Bias in Peer Review.Carole J. Lee, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin - 2013 - Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (1):2-17.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Replicability Crisis and Scientific Reforms: Overlooked Issues and Unmet Challenges.Mattia Andreoletti - 2021 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 33 (3):135-151.
How Are Editors Selected, Recruited and Approved?Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Aceil Al-Khatib - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (6):1801-1804.
DNA Patents and Human Dignity.David B. Resnik - 2001 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 29 (2):152-165.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Commensuration Bias in Peer Review.Carole J. Lee - 2015 - Philosophy of Science 82 (5):1272-1283,.


Added to PP index

Total views
39 ( #293,054 of 2,519,317 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #407,861 of 2,519,317 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes