Open-Access Academic Articles Requires Peer-Review Makeover: Consistency Is the Key

Abstract

The internet has greatly altered the way that people and institutions communicate. One of the most recent changes is the growth of the Open Access (OA) model, where research articles are provided free of charge to readers online. Such changes are having a domino effect on traditional communication. In most cases, articles in professional journals have been evaluated by a strict peer-review system. However, due to the inherent problems with these peer reviews, such as the length of time it takes referees to complete their analysis and the reviewer’s personal biases and potential unethical behavior, there is a growing consensus that a different review method needs to be developed for OA articles. In addition, the internet has led to the development of many new professional journals, which range from poor to excellent, based on the articles accepted. Unfortunately, some journals are being published solely for monetary gain from high author fees. Presently, different review methods are being suggested or implemented for articles, such as ranking systems, online commentaries and crowdsourcing, Also, various institutions are publishing lists that rate academic journals on their quality level. Such experimentation of review models is important. However, after the trial period, the primary OA sources need to agree on using the same review model. Consistency of evaluation is critical for readers to be able to make objective comparisons of scholastic articles from one OA site to another.