Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avis › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › peer review
Towards codes of practice for navigating the academic peer review process. / Sovacool, Benjamin K.; Axsen, Jonn; Delina, Laurence L. et al.
I: Energy Research and Social Science, Bind 89, 102675, 07.2022.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avis › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Towards codes of practice for navigating the academic peer review process
AU - Sovacool, Benjamin K.
AU - Axsen, Jonn
AU - Delina, Laurence L.
AU - Boudet, Hilary Schaffer
AU - Rai, Varun
AU - Sidortsov, Roman
AU - Churchill, Sefa Awaworyi
AU - Jenkins, Kirsten E.H.
AU - Galvin, Ray
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s)
PY - 2022/7
Y1 - 2022/7
N2 - Peer review is the bedrock of modern academic research and its lasting contributions to science and society. And yet, reviewers can submit “poor” peer review reports, authors can blatantly ignore referee advice, and editors can contravene and undermine the peer review process itself. In this paper, we, the Editors of Energy Research & Social Science (ER&SS), seek to establish peer review codes of practice for the general energy and social science research community. We include suggestions for three of the most important roles: peer reviewers or referees, editors, and authors. We base our 33 recommendations on a collective 60 years of editorial experience at ER&SS. Our hope is that such codes of practice can enable the academic community to navigate the peer review process more effectively, more meaningfully, and more efficiently.
AB - Peer review is the bedrock of modern academic research and its lasting contributions to science and society. And yet, reviewers can submit “poor” peer review reports, authors can blatantly ignore referee advice, and editors can contravene and undermine the peer review process itself. In this paper, we, the Editors of Energy Research & Social Science (ER&SS), seek to establish peer review codes of practice for the general energy and social science research community. We include suggestions for three of the most important roles: peer reviewers or referees, editors, and authors. We base our 33 recommendations on a collective 60 years of editorial experience at ER&SS. Our hope is that such codes of practice can enable the academic community to navigate the peer review process more effectively, more meaningfully, and more efficiently.
KW - Academic practice
KW - Authors
KW - Codes of conduct
KW - Editors
KW - Misconduct
KW - Peer reviewers
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85131412494&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.erss.2022.102675
DO - 10.1016/j.erss.2022.102675
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85131412494
VL - 89
JO - Energy Research & Social Science
JF - Energy Research & Social Science
SN - 2214-6296
M1 - 102675
ER -