Reviewing the papers submitted to academic
journals requires the voluntary efforts of many scholars who take
the time to read and comment on these papers. Reviewers typically
accept the assignment of reviewing a paper with some expectation
that they will have a month or more to read the paper and return
the review to an editor. They then complete the review when they
have the time in their crowded schedules. Editors are dependent on
such reviewers and encourage the timely return of reviews, but
understand when a reviewer fails to return a review within the
agreed upon time frame.
Compared to the measured pace at which reviewers are expected to
complete reviews for most journals, including our own print
journal, the pace we expect for reviews at tcr Online approaches warp speed! We
have announced our goal of moving research notes through the review
process within two to three weeks and hope to complete reviews of
submitted commentaries within a matter of days. Our ability to
deliver on these promises depends upon the complete cooperation of
reviewers who will be asked to return comments on manuscripts
within a day or so of receiving our request. For most experienced
reviewers this will represent a dramatic change in
expectations.
To help set the stage for this accelerated review process I want
to take this opportunity to explain why we think this might work
for tcr Online and the benefits that our readers and
the community of scholars might anticipate from this change. It is
important for authors, reviewers, and readers to support this more
rapid process of review if it is to function to insure the quality
of our publication.
For authors and reviewers it is important to recognize that an
essential feature of realizing our goal of a rapid review process
is the limitations we have placed on the length of the research
notes and commentaries submitted for peer review. These pieces will
run substantially shorter than the papers submitted for our print
journal. These shorter pieces are intended to be read online, and
they should also be reviewed online. This means that the actual
time spent reading and commenting on a paper should be
significantly shorter than for our typical print articles.
Reviewers will receive instructions for accessing the papers for
review online, and access to the papers will be immediate.
Reviewers will also be able to submit their comments online as soon
as they read the paper. Thus the mechanical barriers to rapid
review have been removed.
However, we are well aware that mechanical barriers are not the
only factors standing between a reviewer and a completed review.
Reviewers are accustomed to setting a paper aside until they have
sufficient time and energy to move through the paper and prepare
comments. Moreover, reviewers sometimes read a paper and think
about it for a period of time before preparing comments for the
editor and the author.
To achieve the goals of the rapid review process we are asking
reviewers to change their approach to the entire review process. We
are encouraging reviewers to access the paper for review as soon as
possible and to prepare their comments immediately after reading
the paper. We hope that once reviewers get used to providing rapid
reviews they will find the process less burdensome than the
traditional review process. Of course, some reviewers will still
want to ponder a paper for a time before submitting comments, but
we are asking reviewers to consider whether taking more time will
result in a more thoughtful review or simply a slower review
process.
Finally, for those who remain unconvinced of the necessity or
wisdom of the rapid review process, remember that the rapid pace of
other media outlets for the results of academic research allow all
manner of findings to appear in public very quickly without the
benefit of peer review. Thus, all too often it is not a choice
between a rapid or slower review process but a choice between a
rapid review process and no peer review at all prior to the release
of findings. If the community of scholars does not wish to
relinquish its quality control function to the popular media, it
will have to move more quickly to review the papers submitted to
major academic journals. We hope that the peer review process we
have developed for tcr Online makes the more rapid review of papers as
painless as possible, and we welcome suggestions for
further improvements.