Peer Review Week 2020 takes place September 21-25, with this year’s featured theme — “Trust in Peer Review” — dedicated to highlighting the importance of building trust in research.

为了纪念这一场合，我们与MarioMalički博士进行了交谈，研究完整性和同行评审，关于同行审查过程，透明度及其如何继续发展。

什么是同行评审，为什么重要？
同行评审是用于学术研究的质量控制机制。这是一个涉及评估研究建议或完成研究人员项目的独立专家的过程。专家本身也经常是研究人员，并且具有与正在评估的工作或建议的人相似的技能，能力和教育 - 这就是为什么他们被视为同伴的原因。

Peer review most commonly occurs when research proposals or projects are written up and submitted to a scholarly journal. Editors of that journal then invite experts to evaluate and scrutinize everything the researchers claimed to have done or are planning to do. This process is important as it aims to both give (or deny) a seal of approval for the submitted article and helps improve our knowledge through communication and advice that passes between the researchers and their peers.

您如何对同行评审作为研究主题感兴趣？
我上面说的可以被视为一般原则或同行评审过程的浪漫化版本。实际上，同行评审过程本身的质量通常是未知的，并且整个过程通常无法进行审查。大多数提交的文章仅由两到三位专家评估，这些专家经常不同意。此外，专家通常不会向科学家或公众披露。因此，我对这个过程的工作原理，专家的寻找是非常感兴趣的，以及他们对科学家的批评或建议。

我还认为，在我作为研究人员的培训期间，我的兴趣中出现了一部分，因为我从导师那里获得的审查要高于我从同行评审员那里获得的第一批十二篇文章。我很痛苦地意识到，我的一些朋友和跟随年轻科学家并不那么幸运。

Can you tell us about your journal,研究完整性和同行评审？

…we provide a venue to researchers that share the same curiosity about the functioning of science that we ourselves have

我们的杂志RIPR（我们经常使用其不祥的声音首字母缩写Ripper参考它）是一本专门研究该期刊的期刊同行评审process,研究报告， 和研究完整性。We are a multidisciplinary journal, as these topics are fundamental for all scholarly disciplines. Research on the methods and functioning of science is today often referred to as meta-science or meta-research.

作为日记，我们仍在开始，目前发布每年大约有20到30篇文章。但是我们一个re proud of our achievements as we provide a venue to researchers that share the same curiosity about the functioning of science that we ourselves have. We hope to see both our journal and the field grow in the upcoming years, and maybe even play a part in the many changes coming to scholarly publishing.

今年的同行评审周主题是“信任”。我们如何鼓励信任同行评审？

…when we are able to see all the steps it took for research to get published, we will be able to more easily make the decision if we trust or agree with what others have said or done.

I think if there was a simple solution, we would’ve applied it to many domains of human existence. It takes a long time to build trust, and only a few bad apples to have it shaken or destroyed. Nevertheless, I am an optimist, and I believe transparency goes a long way.

I have recently proposed the MAnuscripT CHanges (MATCH) taxonomy, that I am now飞行员和refining with fellow meta-researchers. I hope it will one day be used across journals and publishers to describe the changes that occurred during the peer review of submitted articles, as well as between different versions of preprints, and between preprints and their (journal) published versions or record. I believe that when we are able to see all the steps it took for research to get published, we will be able to more easily make the decision if we trust or agree with what others have said or done.

您能解释一下同行评审过程吗研究完整性和同行评审以及期刊如何确保透明度？

When a manuscript is submitted to our journal, our editorial team conducts basic checks for the completeness of the submission as well as plagiarism detection. After that, it is assigned to one of the Co-Editors-in-Chief (乔格或者myself），我们将介绍其内容，以决定该论文是否符合期刊的范围，或者是否需要任何更改，然后我们邀请专家评估它。

We operate an open peer review system and ask our reviewers to sign their reports. In my time as an editor, only one expert declined to review a paper due to this policy. We also provide an option to experts to send us confidential comments they do not wish to be included in their published report. As editors, we provide our comments to the authors, and I will often have more questions for the authors than some of the reviewers. When the article is published, we publish the peer review reports and authors’ rebuttals. Finally, our journal allows authors to utilize Springer Nature’s在评论中服务。

And finally, what are the current discussions surrounding peer review and how is it evolving?

I am happy to see a lot of initiatives around endorsing or reviewing preprints

如果我可以直接宣传我们的日记understanding of peer review。对于那些对同行评论感兴趣的人来说，另一个好的起点是Publon的Global State of Peer Review。

至于未来的发展以及它的发展方式，我很高兴看到有关认可或审查预印本的许多举措（例如，预览,Review Commons,科学的贵族,喝采），演变scite.ai，搜索工程中的链接和参考经理软件（POST）关于PubPeer的出版评论，评估同行评审报告质量的方法的研究，以及拥抱开放式同行评审实践的期刊数量的增加。