Peer Review of Reviewers: The Author’s Perspective

The aim of this study was to investigate the opinion of authors on the overall quality and effectiveness of reviewers’ contributions to reviewed papers. We employed an on-line survey of thirteen journals which publish articles in the field of life, social or technological sciences. Respons...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ivana Drvenica, Giangiacomo Bravo, Lucija Vejmelka, Aleksandar Dekanski, Olgica Nedić
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2018-12-01
Series:Publications
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/1/1
id doaj-891d6ef75a7a41d3806952d4cb925208
record_format Article
spelling doaj-891d6ef75a7a41d3806952d4cb9252082020-11-25T00:05:31ZengMDPI AGPublications2304-67752018-12-0171110.3390/publications7010001publications7010001Peer Review of Reviewers: The Author’s PerspectiveIvana Drvenica0Giangiacomo Bravo1Lucija Vejmelka2Aleksandar Dekanski3Olgica Nedić4Institute for Medical Research, University of Belgrade, 11000 Belgrade, SerbiaDepartment of Social Studies, Centre for Data Intensive Sciences and Applications, Linnaeus University, 35195 Växjö, SwedenDepartment of Social Work, Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, CroatiaDepartment of Electrochemistry, Institute of Chemistry, Technology and Metallurgy, University of Belgrade, 11000 Belgrade, SerbiaInstitute for the Application of Nuclear Energy (INEP), University of Belgrade, 11080 Belgrade, SerbiaThe aim of this study was to investigate the opinion of authors on the overall quality and effectiveness of reviewers’ contributions to reviewed papers. We employed an on-line survey of thirteen journals which publish articles in the field of life, social or technological sciences. Responses received from 193 authors were analysed using a mixed-effects model in order to determine factors deemed the most important in the authors’ evaluation of the reviewers. Qualitative content analysis of the responses to open questions was performed as well. The mixed-effects model revealed that the authors’ assessment of the competence of referees strongly depended on the final editorial decision and that the speed of the review process was influential as well. In Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) analysis on seven questions detailing authors’ opinions, perception of review speed remained a significant predictor of the assessment. In addition, both the perceived competence and helpfulness of the reviewers significantly and positively affected the authors’ evaluation. New models were used to re-check the value of these two factors and it was confirmed that the assessment of the competence of reviewers strongly depended on the final editorial decision.http://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/1/1reviewers’ reportsauthors’ opinionon-line surveymixed-effect modelcontent analysis
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ivana Drvenica
Giangiacomo Bravo
Lucija Vejmelka
Aleksandar Dekanski
Olgica Nedić
spellingShingle Ivana Drvenica
Giangiacomo Bravo
Lucija Vejmelka
Aleksandar Dekanski
Olgica Nedić
Peer Review of Reviewers: The Author’s Perspective
Publications
reviewers’ reports
authors’ opinion
on-line survey
mixed-effect model
content analysis
author_facet Ivana Drvenica
Giangiacomo Bravo
Lucija Vejmelka
Aleksandar Dekanski
Olgica Nedić
author_sort Ivana Drvenica
title Peer Review of Reviewers: The Author’s Perspective
title_short Peer Review of Reviewers: The Author’s Perspective
title_full Peer Review of Reviewers: The Author’s Perspective
title_fullStr Peer Review of Reviewers: The Author’s Perspective
title_full_unstemmed Peer Review of Reviewers: The Author’s Perspective
title_sort peer review of reviewers: the author’s perspective
publisher MDPI AG
series Publications
issn 2304-6775
publishDate 2018-12-01
description The aim of this study was to investigate the opinion of authors on the overall quality and effectiveness of reviewers’ contributions to reviewed papers. We employed an on-line survey of thirteen journals which publish articles in the field of life, social or technological sciences. Responses received from 193 authors were analysed using a mixed-effects model in order to determine factors deemed the most important in the authors’ evaluation of the reviewers. Qualitative content analysis of the responses to open questions was performed as well. The mixed-effects model revealed that the authors’ assessment of the competence of referees strongly depended on the final editorial decision and that the speed of the review process was influential as well. In Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) analysis on seven questions detailing authors’ opinions, perception of review speed remained a significant predictor of the assessment. In addition, both the perceived competence and helpfulness of the reviewers significantly and positively affected the authors’ evaluation. New models were used to re-check the value of these two factors and it was confirmed that the assessment of the competence of reviewers strongly depended on the final editorial decision.
topic reviewers’ reports
authors’ opinion
on-line survey
mixed-effect model
content analysis
url http://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/1/1
work_keys_str_mv AT ivanadrvenica peerreviewofreviewerstheauthorsperspective
AT giangiacomobravo peerreviewofreviewerstheauthorsperspective
AT lucijavejmelka peerreviewofreviewerstheauthorsperspective
AT aleksandardekanski peerreviewofreviewerstheauthorsperspective
AT olgicanedic peerreviewofreviewerstheauthorsperspective
_version_ 1725424941479755776