The epistemology and ethics of journal reviewing: a second look.

Abstract

The concept of “peer review” is widely regarded as fundamental to ensuring quality, integrity and rigour in all facets of academic and professional life, including career advancement, academic publication and the award of research grants, scholarships and fellowships. However, there is often little reflection on just what peer review is, what it is really meant to achieve and what its limitations may be. The issue of reviewing is an important one for any academic journal not just because it is central to the production process but also because it raises deep epistemological and ethical concerns. Reviewers and editors have the power both to influence the academic progression of authors [1] and to give status to selected information, thus, determining the direction of the research endeavour and the course, quality and reputation of scientific and intellectual practices [2]. An ethics journal such as the JBI should be especially sensitive to the ethical aspects of its own operations and policies. Following a long process of reflection on the issues raised by reviewing practices, the JBI has established comprehensive editorial policies regarding the review of manuscripts submitted to the journal [3]. In the course of our analysis, we sought to clarify: the goals and purposes of reviews and the possible ways in which they may be undermined or compromised; the available evidence regarding the quality and reliability of reviewing for academic journals; the evidence regarding the misuse of the reviewing process; and strategies for preventing abuses of power, such as declarations of dualities of interests and un-blinding of articles and reviews.