Does Transparent Peer Review lead to faster publication times compared to Traditional Peer Review?

​Transparent Peer Review (TPR) enhances the openness of the peer review process by publishing reviewer reports alongside articles, while typically maintaining reviewer anonymity. This approach contrasts with Traditional Peer Review, where reviewer reports are confidential.​

Impact on Publication Timelines:

The effect of TPR on publication timelines varies and is influenced by several factors:​

• Review Process Duration: The time taken for peer review can vary widely across disciplines. For example, average review times range from 12–14 weeks in medical and natural science journals to 25 weeks or more in fields like economics and business. The implementation of TPR does not inherently alter these durations, as the core review process remains unchanged.​pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
• Editorial Workload: TPR may introduce additional tasks, such as preparing reviewer reports for publication. However, these tasks are typically managed post-acceptance and do not significantly impact the overall timeline from submission to publication.​
• Reviewer Participation: Concerns that TPR might deter reviewers, potentially slowing the process, have not been substantiated. Studies indicate that reviewer acceptance rates remain stable under TPR.​

Expectations for Authors:

When submitting to journals utilizing TPR, authors can generally expect publication timelines similar to those of traditional peer review processes. The transparency introduced by TPR primarily enhances the quality and accountability of the review without causing significant delays.​

Role of Scholar9 and OJSCloud in Streamlining Peer Review:

Platforms like Scholar9 and OJSCloud offer integrated solutions that support both Transparent and Traditional Peer Review models. By automating administrative tasks and facilitating seamless communication among authors, reviewers, and editors, these platforms help maintain efficient workflows, ensuring that the adoption of TPR does not adversely affect publication timelines.​

In summary, Transparent Peer Review does not inherently lead to faster or slower publication times compared to Traditional Peer Review. Authors should anticipate similar timelines, with the added benefit of increased transparency in the review process.