search

openjournals / paper-JOSS-oneyear

Paper describing design and first-year of JOSS
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
0 stars 0 forks source link

PeerJ R1C1 #6

Closed kyleniemeyer closed 6 years ago

kyleniemeyer commented 6 years ago

It might be nice to include some information on how reviewers for JOSS submissions are identified and/or selected. It seems quite an open review system and I wonder if the editors have protocols in place to deal with multiple unsolicited reviewers jumping onto a submission's review Github issue, potentially with conflicting opinions or biases in their experiences.

arfon commented 6 years ago

It seems quite an open review system and I wonder if the editors have protocols in place to deal with multiple unsolicited reviewers jumping onto a submission's review Github issue, potentially with conflicting opinions or biases in their experiences.

I feel like I've seen this once somewhere where a second reviewer jumped into the thread and provided a good review. I don't seem to be able to find this review issue though...

This is pretty uncommon though and I've certainly not thought about protocols for dealing with an unwanted review.

danielskatz commented 6 years ago

We might say that at this point, we haven't seen any issues where "jumpers-in" have tried to disrupt or bias a review. I think that if this did happen, the editor would be able to handle it.

kyleniemeyer commented 6 years ago

Right, I think we can add something brief about how we've seen additional reviewers/bystanders jump in, but anecdotally it has only been a positive thing (and the editor would handle other situations).