Authors should prepare for post-publication review - Analysis and opinion - Research Information

" ... But the scientific publishing and reward system is changing in many ways that affect the life of a paper after it is published. First, the traditional system of anonymous peer review before publication is coming under criticism for not spotting problems with some high-profile papers. The reports of arsenic-based life or STAP stem cells are extreme examples, but they show that review by just a few peers is not always sufficient to spot problems in a study. Second, a new kind of journal has emerged where pre-publication peer review assesses only whether the science is sound, not how exciting it is. The megajournal approach acknowledges that judging the ‘importance’ of a piece of research is subjective, so a small number of peer reviewers and editors can make the wrong call. Many of these journals are also cutting down on the copy-editing they do after papers are accepted. And third, more and more researchers – including some biologists as well as most physicists – are posting preprints online, and journals are emerging that offer peer review after publication. On these platforms, papers that have not been peer reviewed are visible to anyone. All these trends mean that there is a greater need for post-publication peer review, both to identify problems with papers and preprints and to help readers find the exciting ones in their field of interest ..."