Banelyte, V.

Görögh, E.

Schmidt, B.

Stanciauskas, V.

Woutersen-Windhouwer, S.

English

This report demonstrates how alternative peer review tools and methods are instrumental in further shaping the communication of scholarly results towards open science. The analysis is based on the examination of various review methods (peer commentary, post-publication peer review, decoupled review, portable or cascading review) and review tools and services (publishing platforms, repository-based, independent reviews). Besides the differences in operation and functionality, these new workflows and services combine common features of network-based solutions and collaborative research applications with varying degrees of openness (e.g. regarding participation, identities and/or reports). They, therefore, represent good examples of open science, in terms of transparency and networking among researchers

International Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion online publications

Deliverable D3.1– Practices, evaluation and mapping: Methods, tools and user needs:OPENing UP new methods, indicators and tools for peer review, impact measurement and dissemination of research results

https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/38279088/OpenUP_D3.1_Peer_review_landscape_report_1.pdf

Deliverable D3.1– Practices, evaluation and mapping: Methods, tools and user needs:OPENing UP new methods, indicators and tools for peer review, impact measurement and dissemination of research results

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

International Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion online publications