There is a growing debate about expertise in peer review. The debate focuses on claims that lived experience needs to be a requirement for those reviewing papers from marginalized, minority groups or persons who face discrimination.
What do you think are the appropriate responses and strategies to address the concerns expressed in the debate?
There lies the sharp distinction between good and bad journals. In good journals the reviewers are likely to be good. I personally prefer review by two specialists.
Coming to Phytotaxa, a journal devoted to plant taxonomy, they have many section editors. Not all are of excellent quality.
In a few cases I felt that the section editors are holding the MSS for a longer time than expected, probably due to some vested interest.
In my opinion, the journals preferring reviewera based diversity of experiences are headed in the right direction. The world is undergoing increased complexity. The lived experience is one way to assure that the reviewers inderstand the complex phenomenon captured by the publication being reviewed.
I am definitely for inclusion an diversity. We should find pragmatic ways of working towards that.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers