This large-scale international study measures the attitudes of more than 4,000 researchers toward peer review. In 2009, 40,000 authors of research papers from across the globe were invited to complete an online survey. Researchers were asked to rate a number of general statements about peer review, and then a subset of respondents, who had themselves peer reviewed, rated a series of statements concerning their experience of peer review. The study found that the peer review process is highly regarded by the vast majority of researchers and considered by most to be essential to the communication of scholarly research. Nine out of 10 authors believe that peer review improved the last paper they published. Double-blind peer review is considered the most effective form of peer review. Nearly three quarters of researchers think that technological advances are making peer review more effective. Most researchers believe that although peer review should identify fraud, it is very difficult for it to do so. Reviewers are committed to conducting peer review in the future and believe that simple practical steps, such as training new reviewers would further improve peer review.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to understand how the migration from the print world to the electronic environment has affected the motivations, attitudes and behaviours of researchers in scholarly communication. Design/methodology/approach -The paper takes the form of an investigation that is both quantitative and qualitative. The study was split into three phases: understand the issues affecting researchers (focus groups and interviews); an online survey of 6,344 researchers measuring attitudes and digging deeper into issues: telephone interviews to understand differences between different groups change. Differences in opinions were examined across discipline. Findings -While there has been some change in the behaviour of researchers, there has been little change in their motivations for publication. Researchers want other researchers' data but are less inclined to share their own. Researcher attitudes towards repositories are very mixed. Researchers highly value peer review. The pressure to over-publish at the expense of quality is exaggerated. Research limitations/implications -Further research is required to measure the impact on researcher motivations and attitudes of external pressures that were emerging at the time of this study. This includes the growing influence of funding bodies, the economic downturn and its impact on institutional budgets, as well as subsequent advances in the digital revolution. Practical implications -This research suggests that, while technology may have positively impacted the efficiency of scholarly communication, the drivers behind scholarly information exchange remain relatively unchanged. Moreover, changes to the scholarly information business model will only be successful if they continue to satisfy the underlying motivations and needs of researchers. Originality/value -This paper fulfils an identified need to measure the motivations of researchers towards the core functions of scholarly communication on a global level.

No abstract