6533b7dafe1ef96bd126f5f1
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Fragments of peer review: A quantitative analysis of the literature (1969-2015)
Francisco GrimaldoFlaminio SquazzoniAna Marušićsubject
0301 basic medicineScience and Technology WorkforceResearch Quality Assessmentlcsh:MedicineCareers in ResearchPeer review co-authorship collaboration communityCitation analysisCentralityData MiningSociologylcsh:ScienceMultidisciplinary05 social sciencesScientometricsco-authorshipResearch AssessmentKnowledge sharingProfessionsCitation AnalysiscommunityNetwork AnalysisResearch ArticleComputer and Information SciencesScience PolicyAbstracting and IndexingPeer ReviewAbstracting and Indexing as Topic ; Animals ; Data Mining ; Databases Bibliographic ; History 20th Century ; History 21st Century ; Humans ; Peer ReviewScopusLibrary science050905 science studiesResearch and Analysis MethodsHistory 21st Century03 medical and health sciencesAnimalsHumansScientific Publishinglcsh:RScientometricsHistory 20th CenturyDatabases Bibliographiccollaboration030104 developmental biologyQuantitative analysis (finance)People and PlacesScientistslcsh:QPopulation Groupings0509 other social sciencesScientific publishingCentralitydescription
This paper examines research on peer review between 1969 and 2015 by looking at records indexed from the Scopus database. Although it is often argued that peer review has been poorly investigated, we found that the number of publications in this field doubled from 2005. A half of this work was indexed as research articles, a third as editorial notes and literature reviews and the rest were book chapters or letters. We identified the most prolific and influential scholars, the most cited publications and the most important journals in the field. Co-authorship network analysis showed that research on peer review is fragmented, with the largest group of co-authors including only 2.1% of the whole community. Co-citation network analysis indicated a fragmented structure also in terms of knowledge. This shows that despite its central role in research, peer review has been examined only through small-scale research projects. Our findings would suggest that there is need to encourage collaboration and knowledge sharing across different research communities.
| year | journal | country | edition | language |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-01-01 |