Causes, Consequences, and Future Potential
By Lizi Dawes, CEO, PA EDitorial, Sponsor of the ALPSP Impact Award and the ALPSP Award for Innovation in Publishing 2024.
My journey to this point has been one of unexpected twists and turns, defying the linear career paths often expected in the peer review world. Being raised in a family where the office and home blended together, I quickly developed a passion for technology and a keen understanding of the need for processes that had to be fluid in response to shifting demands and trends. These skills have served me well, especially since entering academic publishing and peer review management, where I have seen many changes since I began over thirteen years ago.
Now, I find myself honoured to be invited to write this piece for ALPSP, whose Impact Awards are successfully in their second year: a testament to the power of initiatives, projects, and collaborations that can bring change within the scholarly publishing realm.
When asked to discuss peer review, I could write about many things, such as reflections and insights from my experiences in the industry. I could especially tell you why I feel so passionate about the subject; the list is long, but my main reasons include:
- Breadth of perspectives – it has a major role in providing diverse perspectives and expertise while delivering valuable feedback.
- Robust and reliable research – it’s a collective process leading to the development of more robust and reliable research.
- Collaboration and community – it fosters a collaborative environment within the academic community.
- Knowledge and ideas exchange – it offers an exchange of ideas, knowledge sharing, and exploring new research directions.
- Mitigating bias and promoting diversity – it’s crucial in mitigating and addressing biases and promoting diversity.
- Recognition for researchers – it increases recognition and expert status for researchers with published peer-reviewed work.
- Professional advancement opportunities – it provides opportunities for funding, collaboration, and professional advancement.
- Ethical and integrity protection – it exists for a fundamental reason – an ‘Old Guard’ for ethics and integrity.
Yet, while nearly all these thoughts on the subject are equally weighted, one in particular stands above the rest.
- The impact of peer review growth – Ultimately, it’s a subject of two halves – challenges and solutions – something I relish the potential of.
Some may see growth as a problem, but invariably, it isn’t. What growth can bring – good and bad – and how we deal with those two things can substantially impact our profession.
As with every system, peer review has its shortcomings. When something grows, so do these shortcomings unless we grapple with them at their root level. This is an exciting prospect as it means we can actively engage in how our profession develops in the short- and long-term future.
The Systemic Roots of Peer Review
At the core of these challenges is possibly the ‘publish or perish’ culture, which is often considered the source of an unsustainable torrent of research papers, straining the capacity of the peer review system to keep pace.
Additionally, those with peer review responsibilities are a relatively small subset of scholars, yet there is an abundance of outlets for publication, each demanding its own cadre of reviewers.
There are also less obvious challenges that not only impact growth but also provide us with opportunities to make positive and encouraging changes. Some of these challenges include:
- The effect of the pandemic: COVID-19 undoubtedly acted as a catalyst for amplifying some of the core issues faced by peer review.
- The decrease in tenured academics: there has been a reduction in the proportion of tenured faculty members, who traditionally shouldered a significant share of peer review duties as part of their academic service.
- Slower turnaround times: due to a lack of available and/or willing reviewers, delays in the peer review process can often stall scholars’ careers and hinder the timely dissemination of research findings.
- Reliance on volunteers: a small fraction of academics carry most of the workload, with only around 20% contributing to 94% of peer review work. [1]
- Lack of transparency: sometimes, the lack of transparency can also cause challenges, such as the anonymity of the peer reviewers, making it difficult to assess the objectivity and qualifications of the individuals providing the feedback.
- The challenges of generative AI: it’s also important not to forget the emerging challenges of AI. While some researchers see the potential for AI to enhance the process, others are wary of the ethical implications and the potential for misuse. Around 35% of researchers feel that generative AI tools will negatively impact the peer review process. [2]
Knowing the obvious and the hidden challenges of any system puts those within it at an advantage. One of the things I love about peer review is that we are always, as a profession, exploring how we can better serve the system, improve the processes, and ensure, collaboratively, that we are upholding the values that it stands for.
Potential Solutions: A Multifaceted Approach
Addressing the challenges facing peer review necessitates a multifaceted approach that tackles the underlying systemic issues while exploring innovative solutions to alleviate the immediate pressures on the system.
Inclusive Reviewer Recruitment
Journals could adopt more inclusive strategies for recruiting peer reviewers, tapping into a wider pool of experts, including non-tenured scholars, PhD researchers, industry professionals, and underrepresented minorities. This approach can help address geographical biases and ensure a more diverse and representative review process.
Additionally, creating a centralised database of reviewers accessible to all journals could streamline the process of identifying and engaging qualified reviewers, reducing the administrative burden on individual journals.
Incentivising Peer Review Through Recognition
While financial compensation may remain a contentious issue, there is a growing consensus on the need for greater recognition and incentives for peer review contributions. Universities and research institutions could explicitly acknowledge and reward outstanding peer review efforts as part of tenure and promotion evaluations, fostering a culture that values this critical academic service.
Furthermore, integrating peer review activities into platforms like ORCID and Publons could enhance the visibility and recognition of individual scholars’ review contributions, potentially motivating greater participation.
Embracing Open Peer Review
The growing movement towards open peer review could foster a more transparent and collaborative approach. Initiatives like publishing review letters and allowing for voluntary identification of reviewers can help build trust and accountability within the system.
Prioritising Time-Sensitive Research
To address the issue of slow turnaround times, journals could prioritise the review of time-sensitive research, ensuring that critical findings are disseminated promptly.
Leveraging Technological Innovations
It is also crucial to recognise the potential of technological advancements, such as improvements to online manuscript and review submission systems, to streamline the peer review process and enhance the overall experience for authors and reviewers. This is a particular passion of mine, along with embracing the positive powers of AI while being mindful of its pitfalls.
The Way Forward: Collaboration and Adaptation
Addressing the peer review crisis demands a collaborative and holistic effort from all stakeholders within the academic ecosystem, including researchers, institutions, publishers, funding bodies and peer review management services such as PA EDitorial.
By fostering open dialogue, embracing innovative solutions, and adapting to the evolving challenges and growth of scholarly communication, the academic community can collectively navigate this challenge and safeguard the integrity of the peer review process – a cornerstone of scientific progress and knowledge dissemination.
Nurturing a Culture of Learning and Support
At the heart of what we do at PA EDitorial is our approach to deepening our commitment to nurturing a culture of learning and support within our organisation.
This approach isn’t just aimed at our team of freelancers, who we believe all have their very own super skills. We also strive to build teams that can help the academic research community. My role in this is contributing to and building up the community by supporting peer review in every way I can, from attending events where I can learn more and develop my knowledge and skills to working closely with journals – finding solutions to their problems and options for their challenges.
We all have a part to play in ensuring that the peer review process is upheld and ready to adapt to the changes that time inevitably brings.
What remains constant is my excitement and curiosity about the future of peer review and its influence on global research, along with my admiration for how all research disciplines affect every member of society.
Together, we must evolve and innovate within academia to preserve research integrity and guarantee the effective sharing of knowledge. Our work is crucial and ultimately benefits everyone.
About the author
Lizi Dawes is CEO of PA Editorial. Find out more.
