As is well known, peer review can be carried out in several ways. Traditionally, anonymity is a cornerstone of the procedure, whereby (1) either the reviewer is not known by name, but the author is (single-blind peer review); (2) the procedure is completely anonymous (double-blind peer review). In both cases, reviewers are usually selected by the editors and both the reviews and reactions to them are treated confidentially, i.e. they are not published. It was repeatedly pointed out that in practice the evaluation procedure cannot keep the promise of guaranteeing better quality through an anonymised and moderated process, often failing to provide for actual anonymity in the first place, but also failing to employ the advantages of open and varied debate.
The SIG aims to:
- further explore open peer review (OPR) as a possible alternative, with respect to open identities, open reports and open participation/open interaction
- exchange OPR practices and best practice examples in media studies and beyond.
If you are interested to join our discussions and activities in this field please feel free to contact the SIG members:
Adelheid Heftberger (see contacts)