The Association of Learned & Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP), European Association of Science Editors (EASE)
The aim of this combined ALPSP/EASE survey was to achieve a greater understanding of the peer review process in a variety of disciplines and to provide a set of agreed guidelines. The survey was exclusively online and was made available on the ALPSP website in October 2000. The questionnaire was highlighted in the news section of the home page and remained there for just over one month, during which 200 responses were collected and considerable interest was generated. The following report shows the results of the survey and also includes comments received by email during the time that the questionnaire was displayed
https://www.alpsp.org/write/mediauploads/current_practice_in_peer_review.pdf
Sense about Science
Should peer review detect fraud and misconduct? What does it do for science and what does the scientific community want it to do? Will it illuminate good ideas or shut them down? Should reviewers remain anonymous? In 2009, Sense about Science developed one of the largest ever international surveys of authors and reviewers, the Peer Review Survey 2009
http://senseaboutscience.org/activities/peer-review-survey-2009/
Taylor & Francis
In 2015, Taylor & Francis asked researchers from around the world to take part in an online survey and a series of focus groups, which aimed to explore what the experience of peer review was like for those involved in it on a regular basis: for the authors who write the papers, for the reviewers who review them, and for the journal editors who oversee the process.
Mark Ware
This survey intends to deliver a snapshot of current opinions and attitudes to different types of peer review from the viewpoint of both researchers and reviewers. In addition, it also delivers a comparison with earlier studies.
This publication was supported by: Research Information Network, Society for Endocrinology, Vitae, Institute for Physics and Engineering in Medicine, The Association for Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Elsevier, Sage, PRE (Peer Review Evaluation), Medical Research Council, The Physiological Society, Wiley, Society for General Microbiology, BioMed Central, PLOS, Taylor and Francis and Society for Applied Microbiology.
Reprinted in 2014 with support from BioMed Central, Elsevier, PLOS, Taylor and Francis, Wiley and PRE (Peer Review Evaluation).
A guide to peer review written for early career researchers.
This is a nuts and bolts guide to peer review for early career researchers written by members of the VoYS network. Using a collection of concerns raised by their peers, the VoYS writing team set off to interview scientists, journal editors, grant bodies’ representatives, patient group workers and journalists in the UK and around the world to find out how peer review works, the challenges for peer review and how to get involved.
http://senseaboutscience.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/peer-review-the-nuts-and-bolts.pdf
