Loughborough University
Leicestershire, UK
LE11 3TU
+44 (0)1509 263171
Loughborough University

Loughborough University Institutional Repository

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/26343

Title: "Let the community decide”? The vision and reality of soundness-only peer review in open-access mega-journals
Authors: Spezi, Valerie C.L.
Wakeling, Simon
Pinfield, Stephen
Fry, Jenny
Creaser, Claire
Willett, Peter
Keywords: Open access
Peer review
Soundness only
Scholarly communication
Journal publishing
Issue Date: 2018
Publisher: Emerald © Valerie Spezi, Simon Wakeling, Stephen Pinfield, Jenny Fry, Claire Creaser and Peter Willett
Citation: SPEZI, V. ... et al, 2018. "Let the community decide”? The vision and reality of soundness-only peer review in open-access mega-journals. Journal of Documentation, 74(1), pp.137-161.
Abstract: Purpose: The aim of this research is to better understand the theory and practice of peer review in open-access mega-journals (OAMJs). Mega-journals typically operate a “soundness only” review policy aiming to evaluate only the rigour of an article, not the novelty or significance of the research or its relevance to a particular community, with these elements being left for “the community to decide” post-publication. Design/methodology/approach: The paper reports the results of interviews with 31 senior publishers and editors representing 16 different organisations, including 10 that publish an OAMJ. Thematic Analysis was carried out on the data and an analytical model developed to explicate their significance. Findings: Findings suggest that in reality criteria beyond technical or scientific soundness can and do influence editorial decisions. Deviations from the original OAMJ model are both publisher-supported (in the form of requirements for an article to be ‘worthy’ of publication) and practice-driven (in the form of some reviewers and editors applying traditional peer review criteria to mega-journal submissions). Also publishers believe post-publication evaluation of novelty, significance, and relevance remains problematic. Originality/value: The study is based on unprecedented access to senior publishers and editors, allowing insight into their strategic and operational priorities. The paper is the first to report in-depth qualitative data relating specifically to soundness-only peer review for OAMJs, shedding new light on the mega-journal phenomenon, and helping inform discussion on its future role in scholarly communication. The paper proposes a new model for understanding the mega-journal approach to quality assurance, and how it is different from traditional peer review.
Description: Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
Version: Published
DOI: 10.1108/JD-06-2017-0092
URI: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/26343
Publisher Link: https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-06-2017-0092
ISSN: 0022-0418
Appears in Collections:Published Articles (English and Drama)

Files associated with this item:

File Description SizeFormat
JD-06-2017-0092.pdfPublished version364.08 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


SFX Query

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.