How does it work?

The first Peer Community in has been launched: Peer Community in Evolutionary Biology

Coming in late 2017 or 2018: PCI Ecology, PCI Paleontology and PCI Computational Statistics

More than 320 recommenders have already joined Peer Community in Evolutionary Biology.  Visit its website : www.evolbiol.peercommunityin.org

How Does it work?

Recommenders of a Peer Community in X recommend articles which have not been yet peer-reviewed – typically unpublished preprints deposited on an open repository. They can also recommend already been peer-reviewed, corresponding for instance to preprints recommended by another Peer Community in X or articles published in traditional scientific journals.

Recommendation of preprints (i.e. articles not yet peer-reviewed)

  1. A group of authors deposits a preprint on an open repository, such as arXiv, bioRxiv, etc., and the corresponding author can inform a Peer Community in X that he/she would like this preprint to be considered for recommendation (a dedicated webpage serves this purpose). Doing so, he/she certifies that this preprint is not under consideration by a traditional journal or by another Peer Community in X. He/she also declares that he/she will wait at least 20 days before either submitting this preprint to a journal or soliciting another Peer Community in X. This delay allows the solicited Peer Community in X to initiate a recommendation process.
  2. Recommenders of the Peer Community in X are alerted by the request of the corresponding author. If one recommender finds the preprint particularly interesting, he/she can decide to initiate the recommendation process. He/she becomes the “recommender” of this preprint.
  3. An e-mail is sent to the corresponding author of the preprint to explain the process, to check that the preprint is not under review in a journal or by another Peer Community in X and to check that the authors would be willing to modify the manuscript if necessary to obtain the recommendation.
  4. The “recommender” finds at least 2 reviewers within or outside Peer Community in X, on the basis of his/her expertise. The “recommender” and reviewers write their reviews. The “recommender” continues to solicit reviews until he/she obtains at least 2 high-quality reviews.
  5. The “recommender” sends the reviews (which may or may not be written anonymously, at the reviewer’s discretion) to the authors and asks for modifications, if required. He/she eventually writes a short text of recommendation (together with the other reviewers, if they are willing to do so) explaining the recommendation, when all the requested modifications have been made.
  6. The recommendation text signed by the recommender, all reviews (anonymous or not), and the link to the last version of the manuscript are sent to the Managing board of Peer Community in X. Before sending their recommendation and review, all recommenders and reviewers will have to certify that they have no conflict of interests of any kind with the content and with the authors of the article, and that they are not recommending or reviewing an article published by close colleagues, recent co-authors, relatives or friends. The Managing board performs a quality check on the format and the deontology of reviews and recommendation.
  7. The recommendation text signed by the recommender, all reviews (anonymous or not), and the link to the last version of the manuscript are finally posted on the web site of Peer Community in X.

Recommendation of a published paper of articles already peer-reviewed

  1. A recommender of a Peer Community in X reads an article already peer-reviewed (e.g. an article published in a journal or a preprint recommended by another Peer Community in X), finds it particularly interesting and would like to recommend it. He/she becomes “recommender” of this article.
  2. He/she looks for a second “recommender” within or outside its Peer Community in X, on the basis of his/her expertise for a joint recommendation of the manuscript. They write together a short text of recommendation (at least about half page). Reviews are not needed, because the article was already reviewed.
  3. Both “recommenders” sign the recommendation text and send it with the link to the Managing board of their Peer Community in X. Before sending their recommendation, all recommenders will have to certify that they have no conflict of interests of any kind with the content or with the authors of the article, and that they are not recommending an article published by close colleagues, recent co-authors, relatives or friends. The Managing board performs a quality check on the format and the deontology of the recommendation.
  4. The recommendation text signed by the recommenders is posted on the web site of the Peer Community in X.

 

See the Project in a few lines

See the Recommended Preprints

See the Reasons to believe in this project

See How does it work?

See Why Peer Community in?

See Who supports Peer Community in?

See the FAQ

See the Code of ethical conduct

See the Movies and posters

See Recent modifications

See À propos / Legal Notice

 

Photography Credit: Ben Lee, Stockholm Library (CC-BY-NS-2.0)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s