"Because it is the Right Thing to Do'': Taking Stock of the Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative

Maike Dahrendorf; Tabea Hoffmann; Maximilian Mittenbühler; Sera Wiechert; Alexandra  Sarafoglou; Dora Matzke; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers

doi:10.5334/jeps.506

"Because it is the Right Thing to Do'': Taking Stock of the Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative

Maike Dahrendorf, Tabea Hoffmann, Maximilian Mittenbühler, Sera Wiechert, Alexandra Sarafoglou^*, Dora Matzke, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

The Peer Reviewers’ Openness (PRO) Initiative promotes the sharing of data and code. PRO signatories pledge to provide a full review only for manuscripts that publicly share data and code, or include a justification why sharing is not possible. Since the punitive element of this approach attracted criticism, we conducted a survey to assess signatories’ experiences with PRO. Contrary to the criticism, the reported experiences were predominantly positive, and 92% (117/127) of the signatories indicated that they would sign the initiative again today. Only 19 out of 127 respondents (15%) experienced negative reactions. Almost 50 respondents suggested ways in which PRO could be improved. We conclude that, from the signatories’ perspective, the benefits of the PRO initiative outweigh its drawbacks.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	15-20
Number of pages	6
Journal	Journal of European Psychology Students
Volume	11
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.5334/jeps.506
Publication status	Published - 19-May-2020
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Open Science
Data sharing
Transparency
Peer review
Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative
Survey

Access to Document

10.5334/jeps.506Licence: CC BY

Handle.net

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{3299623084744a3ab335b74c57b23051,

title = "{"}Because it is the Right Thing to Do'': Taking Stock of the Peer Reviewers{\textquoteright} Openness Initiative",

abstract = "The Peer Reviewers{\textquoteright} Openness (PRO) Initiative promotes the sharing of data and code. PRO signatories pledge to provide a full review only for manuscripts that publicly share data and code, or include a justification why sharing is not possible. Since the punitive element of this approach attracted criticism, we conducted a survey to assess signatories{\textquoteright} experiences with PRO. Contrary to the criticism, the reported experiences were predominantly positive, and 92% (117/127) of the signatories indicated that they would sign the initiative again today. Only 19 out of 127 respondents (15%) experienced negative reactions. Almost 50 respondents suggested ways in which PRO could be improved. We conclude that, from the signatories{\textquoteright} perspective, the benefits of the PRO initiative outweigh its drawbacks.",

keywords = "Open Science, Data sharing, Transparency, Peer review, Peer Reviewers{\textquoteright} Openness Initiative, Survey",

author = "Maike Dahrendorf and Tabea Hoffmann and Maximilian Mittenb{\"u}hler and Sera Wiechert and Alexandra Sarafoglou and Dora Matzke and Eric-Jan Wagenmakers",

year = "2020",

month = may,

day = "19",

doi = "10.5334/jeps.506",

language = "English",

volume = "11",

pages = "15--20",

journal = "Journal of European Psychology Students",

issn = "2222-6931 ",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - "Because it is the Right Thing to Do''

T2 - Taking Stock of the Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative

AU - Dahrendorf, Maike

AU - Hoffmann, Tabea

AU - Mittenbühler, Maximilian

AU - Wiechert, Sera

AU - Sarafoglou, Alexandra

AU - Matzke, Dora

AU - Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan

PY - 2020/5/19

Y1 - 2020/5/19

N2 - The Peer Reviewers’ Openness (PRO) Initiative promotes the sharing of data and code. PRO signatories pledge to provide a full review only for manuscripts that publicly share data and code, or include a justification why sharing is not possible. Since the punitive element of this approach attracted criticism, we conducted a survey to assess signatories’ experiences with PRO. Contrary to the criticism, the reported experiences were predominantly positive, and 92% (117/127) of the signatories indicated that they would sign the initiative again today. Only 19 out of 127 respondents (15%) experienced negative reactions. Almost 50 respondents suggested ways in which PRO could be improved. We conclude that, from the signatories’ perspective, the benefits of the PRO initiative outweigh its drawbacks.

AB - The Peer Reviewers’ Openness (PRO) Initiative promotes the sharing of data and code. PRO signatories pledge to provide a full review only for manuscripts that publicly share data and code, or include a justification why sharing is not possible. Since the punitive element of this approach attracted criticism, we conducted a survey to assess signatories’ experiences with PRO. Contrary to the criticism, the reported experiences were predominantly positive, and 92% (117/127) of the signatories indicated that they would sign the initiative again today. Only 19 out of 127 respondents (15%) experienced negative reactions. Almost 50 respondents suggested ways in which PRO could be improved. We conclude that, from the signatories’ perspective, the benefits of the PRO initiative outweigh its drawbacks.

KW - Open Science

KW - Data sharing

KW - Transparency

KW - Peer review

KW - Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative

KW - Survey

U2 - 10.5334/jeps.506

DO - 10.5334/jeps.506

M3 - Article

SN - 2222-6931

VL - 11

SP - 15

EP - 20

JO - Journal of European Psychology Students

JF - Journal of European Psychology Students

IS - 1

ER -

"Because it is the Right Thing to Do'': Taking Stock of the Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Fingerprint

Cite this