Communications of the Association for Information Systems Open Review Depository

Author: Cathal Doyle, Open Review Associate Editor

We are excited to announce the implementation of open peer review, a process designed to foster constructive dialogue and improve the quality of published research. This initiative aims to make the review process more transparent, accountable, and collaborative, benefiting authors, reviewers, and the wider IS research community.

Our Open Peer Review process

• Author Opt-In: Authors submit their manuscripts as usual and choose the Open Peer Review (OPR) option.
• Editorial Approval and Reviewer Selection: The Associate Editor (AE) approves the OPR request and then assigns reviewers who agree to the OPR oath (option to sign review and possible author/reviewer interaction).
• Open Dialogue During Review: Reviewers can directly contact authors for discussion during the review process, with contact details shared by the AE.
• Standard Review and Decision: Reviewers provide their reviews, and the AE makes a standard editorial decision (accept, revise, or reject).
• Public Publication of Reviews & Manuscript: Upon acceptance and revisions, reviews (signed if the reviewers wish to) and author responses are published alongside the manuscript, enabling public commentary.

A more detailed process can be seen here

For Authors

How do I submit my manuscript for open peer review?

To participate in our open peer review process, authors submit their manuscripts through the standard submission portal and, during the submission, choose to opt-in to open peer review. The manuscript will then undergo the standard peer review process, but the reviewers may contact the corresponding author for any clarifications. Following the review, the AE will decide if the manuscript is accepted, and with the author's continued consent, the reviewer reports, and author responses, will be published alongside the published manuscript. There is then an option for public comment on the manuscripts page.

What should I be aware of when deciding to do OPR?

Participating in open peer review offers several benefits, but it's important to be aware of the following:

• Increased Transparency: The reviewer reports will be published, providing greater insight into the evaluation process.
• Constructive Feedback: Open reviews often lead to more detailed and constructive feedback, enhancing the quality of your work.
• Accountability: Reviewers are held more accountable for their comments, promoting fair and respectful evaluations.
• Potential for Public Discourse: Your manuscript and the reviews may become part of a broader public discussion.
• Consider potential for public criticism: While the goal is constructive criticism, be prepared that the public may have comments on your work.

We encourage you to consider these factors carefully before opting for the open peer review option.

For Reviewers

How do I complete an open peer review?

To complete an open peer review:

• Read the Open Peer Review Oath : The four principles are provided below.
• Accept the Invitation: If you are happy with your review(s) being published alongside the accepted manuscript, accept the invitation to review.
• Conduct and Submit Your Review: Perform a thorough and constructive review of the manuscript, adhering to our reviewer guidelines, and submit your completed review through our online system.
• Potential Publication: Your review will be published alongside the manuscript if it is accepted. We will ask you if you want to sign your review(s) at this time, where it is your choice to say yes or no.

What is the Open Science Peer Review Oath?

We have adapted the Open Science Peer Review Oath by Aleksic et al. (2015). The adaptation comes in the form of offering reviewers the choice of whether to sign their review(s) or not (Plos, 2020). The four principles for reviewers are:

• Principle 1: I will sign my name to my review if I feel comfortable in doing so
• Principle 2: I will review with integrity
• Principle 3: I will treat the review as a discourse with you; in particular, I will provide constructive criticism
• Principle 4: I will be an ambassador for the practice of open science

Where can I find out more?

The editorial describing our process in more detail can be found here:

References

Aleksic, J., Alexa, A., Attwood, T. K., Hong, N. C., Dahlö, M., Davey, R., Holger, D., Förstner, K. U., Grigorov, I., Hériché, J-K., Lahti, L., MacLean, D., Markie, M. L., Molloy, J., Schneider, M. V., Scott, C., Smith-Unna, R. & Vieira, B. M. (2015). An open science peer review oath. F1000Research, 3, 271.

Plos. (2020, February 6). Open peer review. PLOS. https://plos.org/resource/open-peer-review/ .