Procedures for adopting open peer review in scientific journals

reports of experiences from editors

Abstract

It investigates the procedures adopted by scientific journals indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) to implement open peer review and reports the editors' perceptions of this practice. The research adopts a quantitative-qualitative approach, with a bibliographic, documentary, and survey-based nature, and data collection was carried out through questionnaires applied to editors. The analysis was conducted based on Bardin’s (2011) content analysis technique. Regarding the procedures for adopting open peer review, most editors reported following their own models and using accessible tools such as Google Drive, Open Journal Systems, Publons, and preprint repositories like bioRxiv, PsyArXiv, MedRxiv, and EGUsphere, without relying on complex technologies. Participants highlighted the fundamental role of editorial mediation in the process and expressed interest in maintaining more transparent evaluation practices. It is concluded that open peer review is understood as a concept with multiple applications, feasible even without sophisticated technological infrastructure, and has shown positive results for journals that adopt it. The research also shows that its adoption occurs in a heterogeneous manner, with optional anonymity considered an essential factor to ensure that authors and reviewers feel safe and free from pressure during the process.