What does the future of peer review look like?
The Peer review process, over the years, has become the cornerstone of the scholarly publishing system.
Publishing processes between acceptance and publication have transformed in the last decade through standardization and automation of production as well as preview publication in place of traditional issue-based approaches.
Upstream processes between submission and acceptance have received some attention, but the changes have been incremental rather than radical. New formats and business models have brought forward this question again.
This interesting round table brings forth key leaders in the industry to share their views on challenges, opportunities, and what the future of peer review may look like? Hear our panelists from Taylor and Francis (T&F), American Chemical Society (ACS), and Mellins Cohen Consulting delve deeper into the opportunities and challenges with peer review, bringing in perspectives from across the scholarly community.
Felma heads the Research Content Services operations in the Philippines. She has 26 years of experience in the different lines of service for STM publishing.
Since joining American Chemical Society Publications in 2007, Jessica has held leadership positions across all aspects of editorial operations and new product development.
Dr Diana Marshall is Head of Reviewer Programmes at Taylor & Francis. In this role she works on projects to support editors in finding suitable peer reviewers and ensuring best practice in peer review, both through improving processes and developing training in how to be a peer reviewer.
After two decades in scholarly publishing, Tasha is now an independent publishing consultant.