Analysis of 10k peer reviews reveals that those for high-#ImpactFactor #journals pay more attention to Materials/Methods but less to Presentation/Reporting (those for low-#JIF journals emphasize solutions) @annasvrn @eggersnsf @ste_mueller &co #PLOSBiologyhttps://plos.io/45tDVzz
An analysis of the content of 10,000 peer review reports reveals that reports submitted to journals with higher impact factors pay more attention to the materials and methods of a study but less attention to presentation and reporting, whereas journa…
Interesting: "In conclusion, peer review in journals with higher impact factors tends to be more thorough, particularly in addressing study methods while giving relatively less emphasis to presentation or suggesting solutions. Differences were modest and variability high, indicating that the Journal Impact Factor is a bad predictor of the quality of peer review of an individual manuscript." #PeerReview
Marc Robinson-Rechavi
in reply to PLOS Biology • • •Frank Aylward
in reply to Marc Robinson-Rechavi • • •