Scientific peer-review - a time for renovation?

  • Mikko Mönkkönen
  • Janne-Tuomas Seppänen Academy of Finland & Peerage of Science
  • Janne Kotiaho University of Jyväskylä
Keywords: Anonymity, Publishing decision, Resubmission, Retraction, Review quality


Ability of the peer review system to deliver what is expected from it is increasingly challenged. Peerage of Science (PoS) is a web-based service, offering new innovations to solve the problems in the current peer-review processes. This keynote talk describes how PoS pursues to keep the traditions of scientific peer-reviewing that are worth retaining and to fix the parts that are broken.


Aarssen, L.W., Tregenza T., Budden A.E., Lortie C.J., Koricheva J. & Leimu R. 2008. Bang for Your Buck: Rejection Rates and Impact Factors in Ecological Journals. The Open Ecology Journal 1: 14-19.

Jubb M. 2015. Scholarly Communication and Peer Review The Current Landscape and Future Trends. Report Commissioned by the Wellcome Trust.

Lee C.J., Sugimoto C.R., Zhang G. & Cronin, B. 2013. Bias in peer review. Journal of The American Society for Information Science and Technology 64: 2-17.

Pautasso M & Schäfer H. 2010. Peer review delay and selectivity in ecology journals. Scientometrics 84: 307-315

Patterson M.S. & Harris S. 2009. The relationship between reviewers’ quality-scores and number of citations for papers published in the journal Physics in Medicine and Biology from 2003–2005. Scientometrics 80:343-351.

Resnik D., Gutierrez-Ford C. & Peddada, S. 2008. Perceptions of Ethical Problems with Scientific Journal Peer Review: An Exploratory Study. Science and Engineering Ethics 14: 305-310.

Retraction Watch 2014. “Potentially groundbreaking,” “highly provocative:” Nature STAP stem cell peer reviews published. Retraction Watch blog article.

Retraction Watch 2015. 64 more papers retracted for fake reviews, this time from Springer journals. Retraction Watch blog article.

Thomson Reuters 2012. Global Publishing: Changes in submission trends and the impact on scholarly publishers. White paper published online by Thomson Reuters.

Vergano D. 2013. Glowing reviews on 'arseniclife' spurred NASA's embrace. Column in USA Today.

Ware M. 2011. Peer review: recent experience and future directions. New Review of Information Networking. 16: 23-53