ASAPbio ran two surveys in advance of the Peer Review meeting: one more general survey for all stakeholders (closed 2018-02-06 with 295 responses) and one on Peer Feedback for authors and reviewers (closed 2018-01-31 with 370 responses).
In this paper, the authors using public information about the identities of editors and reviewers from the Frontiers series of journals, state their results regarding the underrepresentation of female researchers in the peer-review process, and their observations on the tedency of editors of both genders to operate with same-gender preference. It is also highlighted that there is the need for increased efforts to combat subtler forms of gender bias in scholarly publishing.
eLife Early-Career Advisory Group
Many researchers have strong views on peer review. To find out what early-career researchers think eLife Early-Career Advisory Groupconducted a survey in which 10 questions about different aspects of peer review were asked. A total of 264 researchers took part in the survey, including 146 postdoctoral researchers (55% of the total), 61 group leaders (23%) and 51 PhD students (19%). The survey was conducted in September 2017.
https://elifesciences.org/inside-elife/982053f4/early-career-researchers-views-on-peer-review
Peer review in Peerage of Science consists of four stages. Each stage has a deadline, set by the Authors upon sending their manuscript and displayed to Peers deciding whether to engage as a Reviewer.
It is a two-stage publication process. In the first stage, manuscripts that pass a streamlined access-review are immediately typeset and published in the discussion forum in our on-screen format optimized for online reading.
