AI in peer review: permitted author uses, restricted reviewer uses, and emerging hybrid models - September 19, 2025
In scholarly publishing, many policies allow authors to use generative AI when preparing submissions under specified caveats (e.g., community guidance and publisher policies). By contrast, peer-review policies commonly restrict AI use: editors and reviewers are often barred from uploading confidential manuscripts to genAI tools; some venues prohibit genAI in peer… Read More
IOP survey highlights polarization on generative AI use in peer review - September 15, 2025
A global survey by IOP Publishing (IOPP) has found increasing polarization among reviewers in the physical sciences on the use of generative AI in peer review. The study follows a similar survey conducted last year which showed that while some researchers… Read More
Pilot connects peer review comments with preprints in public health journal - September 12, 2025
Scholarly communication is changing rapidly as policy, community norms, and technology reshape how research is shared and evaluated. A central challenge is adopting new models while preserving integrity. Peer review remains a core part of scientific publishing but is often less emphasized in discussions of innovation. Greater openness in peer… Read More
Taylor & Francis survey backs transparent peer review pilot - September 5, 2025
The European Journal of Higher Education (EJHE), published by Taylor & Francis, has released the results of a two-year pilot aimed at enhancing transparency in the peer review process. The findings reveal widespread support from both authors and reviewers for the journal’s transparent peer… Read More
Peer Review in the Age of AI - August 20, 2025
Peer Review Week (PRW) 2025 will take place from 15–19 September, highlighting the role of peer review in safeguarding research quality and integrity. The chosen theme, “Rethinking Peer Review in the AI Era,” reflects growing global attention on how artificial intelligence is reshaping the peer review landscape… Read More
Study examines equity in blinded versus unblinded peer review - August 18, 2025
A new large-scale field study has examined whether keeping author identities hidden during peer review makes the process more equitable. The work, led by Indiana University College of Arts and Sciences professor Tim Pleskac with collaborators Ellie Kyung (Babson College), Gretchen Chapman (Carnegie Mellon University), and Oleg Urminsky (University of… Read More
PLOS outlines measures in response to PNAS study on peer review integrity - August 11, 2025
PLOS has issued a statement in response to a study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) that examined the scale of paper mill operations and peer review manipulation across scholarly publishing. The analysis, which used openly available articles, identified coordinated misconduct patterns such… Read More
South Africa updates Code of Best Practice for scholarly publishing - August 7, 2025
The Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf) has released the 2025 edition of the Revised Code of Best Practice in Scholarly Journal Publishing, Editing, and Peer Review, marking a renewed commitment to ethical and transparent research practices. Initially introduced in 2004 and updated in 2018, the… Read More
Leading medical journal editors reaffirm commitment to independent scientific review - August 6, 2025
The editors-in-chief of JAMA and The New England Journal of Medicine have defended the role of editorial independence in advancing scientific rigor, responding to recent threats to bar government scientists from publishing in established peer-reviewed journals. In a joint opinion piece published in The… Read More
Study reveals risks to peer review integrity from AI-generated feedback - August 1, 2025
A new study has revealed that large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT and Claude can be used to generate biased peer reviews that are difficult to distinguish from those written by humans, presenting a significant threat to the credibility of scholarly publishing. The peer review process remains essential for… Read More
