In recent years，Open science has become a new trend of global scientific research and development，The purpose is to promote the new mode of the formation of research results and peer reviews，Make all aspects of the scientific research process more open、can。Peer review is one of the cornerstones of scientific research，With the continuous change of academic exchanges，The voices of academic transparency from all walks of life are increasingly rising，Peer review system is facing more and more questions。In this process，Open peer evaluation as a response plan is proposed，The main measure is the identity and evaluation report of the public peer reviewer。Current，The effectiveness of the effectiveness and significance of the international academic circles still have some deficiencies，This reporter interviewed foreign scholars。

　　Bet365 app download

A study officer Michele Avissar-Whiting and others at the project affairs officer of Howard Hughes Medical Research Institute in the United States，Critical views from peers help to identify the concept of scientific research、Logic or Method Questions。Peer review as a key link in the scientific research process，Used to evaluate the quality of papers and determine whether it should provide funding for research。But，Traditional peer review mode faces many challenges，There is inefficiency、Easy errors、There are risks of missed fairness。Although the peer review requires the academic community to invest a lot to complete，But it is difficult to find all the problems in a study by 2-3 researchers。So，Some serious defects bet365 live casino games may only be read when the paper is read after the paper is more widely read，can be exposed。At the same time，Lack of transparency will also cover the errors and prejudices in the process of peer evaluation。Most journals have not announced the peer evaluation report when publishing papers，The comments on the dissertation of the rejected dissertation have never been disclosed，This has caused waste of resources to a certain extent。

Traditional peer review mode due to low efficiency and lack of transparency，More and more questioned。Avisa-Wai Ting said，With the pre -printing form, it is more widely accepted and used，Treating people's re -thinking about peer evaluation process。The increasing popularity of the pre -print book provides an important opportunity for the new attempts of peer review methods，It helps to solve the above problems，It also helps to fundamentally shifting peer evaluation practice to constructive cooperation practice。Avisa-Huaiting and others appeal，Accelerate the promotion of pre -printing books sharing，And suggested that researchers actively provide open and constructive peer review for pre -printing books。

Dietmar Wolfram, a professor at the School of Information Research, University of Wisconsin University of Wisconsin University, said in an interview with this reporter，Traditional peer evaluation adopts the form of blind trial，Keep anonymous parties participating in the review，to reduce prejudice in the assessment process，It mainly includes three forms: the three -blind peer review will be anonymous in the evaluation process，Author、The editor of the reviewer and the review of the review of manuscripts do not know each other's identity。Double -blind peer review is a more common approach，Among Bet365 lotto review them, the author and reviewer do not know the identity of each other，In order to ensure the anonymity of the author，The author needs to delete any content that may expose his identity to the reviewer。Single -blind peer review refers to the reviewer knows the author’s identity，But the author does not know the identity of the reviewer。Whether the blind trial can reduce prejudice，and give birth to a more objective evaluation? For the author，The process of blind review is like a black box，Everything is opaque; the hiding of the identity of the reviewer may make the reviewer use anonymous to publish important comments，It is also possible to make it written in comments that lack rigorousness。

　　Open peer review shows a growth trend

Open Scientific Movement aims to work hard to improve the transparency of scientific knowledge production process，and enable scientific research results to be more widely obtained。So far，Open acquisition is the most prominent field in the open scientific movement，People can obtain journals or knowledge bases freely to obtain academic results。Recent，Open science has expanded to the availability of exploring open data and open software，Open peer review is also becoming part of a new round of open scientific movement，Let the traditional anonymous peer evaluation process be made publicized。Open Peer Council is like open acquisition in open science as open data，Is it more common academic practice? Walfram thinks，Need to learn more about the concept of open peer review、The specific practice of the publisher and the views and attitudes of the researchers as the author and the reviewer。

Since the turn of the century，Open peer review has always showed an upward trend。Walfram said，This upward trend is quite extent.。Early applications bet365 best casino games for open peer reviews can be traced back to the early 21st century，"Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics" and "European cells and materials" have different open peer review modes。From then on，The number of journals using open peer review steadily increased，The most remarkable of which is in the field of medicine and health and natural sciences。Overall，The number of open peer evaluation journals occupy a small proportion in academic journals。

The current open -the -line review pattern presents a variety of configurations，Contains different practices from some aspects of open blind review process to the entire process of completely transparent process。Although it is difficult to define the emerging open peer evaluation practice，Walfram Suggestion，People can focus on how to achieve open identity and open reports in the evaluation process，and which final products can be used to open access。，The head of the Open and Repeated Research Team of the Grahmus of Austria, Tony Ross-Hellauer and others in 2017，Three key innovation points for the evaluation of open peer -open identity、Open report and open participation，The identity of the public reviewer、Public peer evaluation report and achieve a wider public participation，and evaluated the support evidence of each innovation point。

Ross-Harolol said，Open peer review is a complicated phenomenon，It reflects a series of possible innovation points in the process of traditional peer evaluation，Promoting an open peer evaluation may have the following impact。First，Open identity and open reports promptly increase the transparency of evaluation，helps to enhance the accountability system，It will also make the interest conflict of the reviewer more obvious，It may lead to the "sharpness" Bet365 lotto review of the reviewer to reduce the comments。Second，Open Report allows the final decision of the academic circles to publicly review the papers。but but，Open identity eliminates the anonymity of the reviewer or author，and the traditional peer review mode is exactly the prejudice in the evaluation process through anonymity。third，Open identity and open report is conducive to the quality of the evaluation，Open participation can increase the number of potential reviewers。Fourth，Open peer review helps to shorten the review cycle，That is, the time of the article was submitted to the journal for review。But，Open identity and open report may also increase the number of reviewers，This leads to extension of the evaluation process。Fifth，If the identity and review report of the reviewer is published，It can have an incentive effect on researchers，Encourage researchers to take the initiative to find peer review opportunities。

　　Adopt more experimental research methods

Open peer evaluation and other open scientific practice simultaneously develop，In view of the more and more journals, the innovative methods under the open peer review framework began，People need practical guidelines to guide the practical process。At present，Open peer review Related exploration is more discussed at the theoretical level，and lack of guidance for specific practice。Rose Harolol and Assistant Professor of the Institute of Social Sciences, the University of Radburg, the Netherlands, Serge Horbach, recently issued an article on the official website of the "Influence Blog" on the official website of the School of Political Economics, England，There are some discussions around the open peer review，But the academic community has never conducted a full study of this。Ross Harolol bet365 live casino games and others appeal，Adopt more experimental research methods for the opening of open peer review。

Previous research shows，Many research evidence is closely related to the attitude and expectations of stakeholders。For example，Supporters who are open identity think，The identity of the public reviewer can increase transparency、Enhanced accountability system; opponents are worried，Signature review may lead to reduced criticism feedback。Recent，Ross Harolol and others made a comprehensive update on the basis of 2017 research，Overview of the new evidence from 2017-2022，Mainly focused on open identity and open report issues in open peer reviews。

Research Discovery，Open peer reviews are still not very common，Only 1%-5%of journals use this method。but but，Research results show，Open identity and open reports will not significantly affect the probability of the reviewer's invitation or the time to complete the review。Compared to open identity，People have a more positive attitude towards open reports，concerns about open identity mainly comes from the adverse consequences that may be caused by some critics.。This kind of concern may lead to weakening criticism，and finally have a negative impact on the peer review process。

Although the research of Ross-Harolol and others has produced some valuable preliminary insights，but，Overall，Research on how the open identity and open reports affect the quality of the dissertation are still less，And this is a key question about the main goals related to peer reviews。This highlights the necessity of further research，Its purpose is to clarify the effectiveness of open peer evaluation practice in different academic fields and a deeper impact。Although some research groups have increased the acceptance bet365 Play online games of various types of open peer reviews，But the implementation of these measures for the diversity of the reviewers、The quality of the evaluation process and the final decision of the journal will affect，It is still unknown to a large extent。