The ups and downs of peer review

Dale J. Benos, Edlira Bashari, Jose M. Chaves, Amit Gaggar, Niren Kapoor, Martin LaFrance, Robert Mans, David Mayhew, Sara McGowan, Abigail Polter, Yawar Qadri, Shanta Sarfare, Kevin Schultz, Ryan Splittgerber, Jason Stephenson, Cristy Tower, R. Grace Walton, Alexander Zotov

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    145 Scopus citations

    Abstract

    This article traces the history of peer review of scientific publications, plotting the development of the process from its inception to its present-day application. We discuss the merits of peer review and its weaknesses, both perceived and real, as well as the practicalities of several major proposed changes to the system. It is our hope that readers will gain a better appreciation of the complexities of the process and, when serving as reviewers themselves, will do so in a manner that will enhance the utility of the exercise. We also propose the development of an international on-line training program for accreditation of potential referees.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)145-152
    Number of pages8
    JournalAmerican Journal of Physiology - Advances in Physiology Education
    Volume31
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jun 2007

    Keywords

    • Blinding
    • Publication

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Physiology

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The ups and downs of peer review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Benos, D. J., Bashari, E., Chaves, J. M., Gaggar, A., Kapoor, N., LaFrance, M., Mans, R., Mayhew, D., McGowan, S., Polter, A., Qadri, Y., Sarfare, S., Schultz, K., Splittgerber, R., Stephenson, J., Tower, C., Walton, R. G., & Zotov, A. (2007). The ups and downs of peer review. American Journal of Physiology - Advances in Physiology Education, 31(2), 145-152. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00104.2006