Open peer review

In February 2006, the journal Biology Direct was launched by BioMed Central, adding another alternative to the traditional model of peer review.If authors can find three members of the Editorial Board who will each return a report or will themselves solicit an external review, the article will be published.[13][independent source needed] In the social sciences, there have been experiments with wiki-style, signed peer reviews, for example in an issue of the Shakespeare Quarterly.In 2014, Life implanted an open peer review system,[19] under which the peer-review reports and authors' responses are published as an integral part of the final version of each article.[20] In an effort to address issues with the reproducibility of research results, some scholars are asking that authors agree to share their raw data as part of the peer review process.[21] As far back as 1962, for example, a number of psychologists have attempted to obtain raw data sets from other researchers, with mixed results, in order to reanalyze them.[22] In 2020 peer review lack of access to raw data led to article retractions in prestigious The New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet.Open identities have been argued to incite reviewers to be "more tactful and constructive" than they would be if they could remain anonymous, while however allowing authors to accumulate enemies who try to keep their papers from being published or their grant applications from being successful.