PCI Registered Reports

Announcements

We are recruiting recommenders (editors) from all research fields!

Your feedback matters! If you have authored or reviewed a Registered Report at Peer Community in Registered Reports, then please take 5 minutes to leave anonymous feedback about your experience, and view community ratings.

Back

488

Title

Finding the right words to evaluate research: An empirical appraisal of eLife’s assessment vocabularyuse asterix (*) to get italics

Authors

Tom E. Hardwicke, Sarah Schiavone, Beth Clarke, Simine VazirePlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

Year

2023

Picture

Abstract

<p>The journal eLife recently announced that it would abandon binary ‘accept/reject’ decisions and instead focus on sharing both peer review reports and short “eLife assessments” representing the consensus opinions of editors and peer reviewers. For consistency, eLife assessments will use phrases drawn from a common vocabulary to convey a study’s “significance” and “strength of support”. In our view, the chosen vocabulary, and their intended ordering, are counterintuitive, which may undermine communication with readers. In this study, we intend to empirically evaluate the psychometric properties of the eLife vocabulary and assess whether an alternative vocabulary has more desirable properties. Our goal is to make a constructive contribution towards a more transparent and informative peer review process at eLife and other journals.</p>

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these data (if you have any problems with the deposit of your data, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org).

You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these scripts (if you have any problems with the deposit of your scripts, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org).

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI, SWHID or URL) giving public access to these codes (if you have any problems with the deposit of your codes, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org).

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Keywords

meta-research, peer review, journal policy, open science

Methods that require specific expertise (optional)

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Thematic fields

Life Sciences, Social sciences

Suggested reviewers - Suggest up to 10 reviewers (provide names and Email addresses). (Optional)

No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

Opposed reviewers - Suggest up to 5 people not to invite as reviewers. (Optional)

e.g. John Doe [john@doe.com]

Submission date

2023-06-16 12:11:14

Recommender

Sarahanne Miranda Field

Reviewers

or Register
Submit a report

Announcements

MANAGING BOARD

MEMBER OF

INDEXED BY