Skip to main content

Table 1 Proposal for the future roadmap into peer review research

From: The limitations to our understanding of peer review

Topic Topics recommended to be researched Difficulty Priority
 Role of editors in peer review Justifications for editorial decisions Medium High
Factors that affect editorial quality, impartiality and their impact Medium High
How editors select reviewers Medium Medium
Impact of reviewer selection on relationships with editors and authors Hard Medium
Editorial competencies and motivations for decisions Medium High
Impact of decisions on epistemic diversity Hard High
Editorial conflicts of interest and relationships with other parties Easy High
Extent of editorial misconduct Hard High
Influence of reviewer recommendations on editorial decisions Medium Medium
Impact of editors’ careers on their scientific career Medium Low
 Role of reviewers in peer review Factors that affect reviewer impartiality and their impact Medium High
Reviewer conflicts of interest and relationships with other parties Easy Medium
Reviewer competencies and motivations Easy High
Factors that affect inter-reviewer reliability Medium Medium
Extent of peer review misconduct Medium High
Expectations for reviewers Easy High
Impact of incentives for reviewers Medium Low
Conformation of reviewers to journal policies Medium Low
Extent to which anonymity is compromised Hard Medium
How do notions of expertise affect reviewer behaviour Hard Medium
Impact of reviewing on scientific careers of reviewers Medium Low
 Role of authors in peer review Impact of author recommendations on reviews and reviewers Medium Medium
 Functionality and quality of peer review What peer review actually is and does Medium High
How does peer review impact scientific discourse Hard High
Relationship between peer review and journal quality Medium Medium
Are there cases where peer review is redundant Medium Medium
Reproducibility of peer review Hard High
The development and impact of peer review standards Medium High
 Social and epistemic impacts of peer review Homogeneity and centralisation of reviewer pools Medium High
Epistemic diversity of peer review Hard High
Impact of peer review on innovation or conservatism Hard High
Peer review as a vehicle for disseminating prestige Hard High
 Type of peer review Factors influencing the choice of peer review type Medium High
Influence of peer review type on quality of review and potential misconduct Medium High
Do micro-publications impact reviewer engagement Medium Low
Is interactive peer review more effective Medium Medium
How have/will preprints impact peer review Medium Medium
Are overlay journals/services more effective Medium Medium
Which OPR services do researchers prefer Easy Medium
What measures can incentivise OPR Medium Medium
Researcher attitudes towards OPR Easy High
Researcher attitudes towards OPR for non-traditional outputs Easy Medium
The impact of OPR on participant diversity Medium High
The impact of blinding on biases and review quality Medium High
Impact of open review reports Hard High
Impact of review type on careers of reviewers Medium Medium
  1. The difficulty levels primarily refer to the relative ease of obtaining empirical data for study, should such data even exist. The priority levels relate to their perceived impact on the future of peer review. Both are subjective estimates of the authors