How does transparent peer review compare to open peer review?
I’ve seen both terms—transparent peer review and open peer review—but I’m not sure if they mean the same thing. Is transparent peer review just a type of open peer review? What are the key differences? I’d like a simple breakdown of how these systems compare.
Great question! While transparent peer review and open peer review are related, they are not exactly the same. Here’s a simple breakdown of how they compare:
Here is a structured comparison of Transparent Peer Review and Open Peer Review:
1. Transparent Peer Review
Definition: The peer review process is visible to the public, meaning reviewer reports, editorial decisions, and author responses are published alongside the article.
Reviewer Identity: May be anonymous or disclosed, depending on the journal’s policy.
Key Benefits:
Enhances research credibility and trust.
Allows readers to understand the review process.
Provides educational value to researchers and authors.
Examples: Used by journals like Nature Communications, BMJ, and platforms such as Scholar9 and OJSCloud for journal management.
2. Open Peer Review
Definition: A broader term that includes various open review practices, such as:
Open Identities – Reviewers’ names are disclosed.
Open Reports – Review comments are publicly available.
Open Participation – Anyone can contribute to the review process.
Reviewer Identity: Typically revealed to promote accountability.
Key Benefits:
Encourages responsible reviewing.
Allows wider participation and input.
Supports transparency in scientific discourse.
Examples: Used by platforms like F1000Research, eLife, and journals hosted on OJSCloud, which supports open review workflows.
Comparison Table
Key Takeaway
Transparent Peer Review focuses on making the review process visible while keeping reviewer identities optional.
Open Peer Review goes a step further by revealing reviewer identities and sometimes allowing community participation.
True scholar network
