{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,15]],"date-time":"2026-05-15T18:19:53Z","timestamp":1778869193303,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":45,"publisher":"Emerald","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2018,1,8]],"date-time":"2018-01-08T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1515369600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/site-policies"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["JD"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,1,8]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Purpose<\/jats:title><jats:p>The purpose of this paper is to better understand the theory and practice of peer review in open-access mega-journals (OAMJs). OAMJs typically operate a \u201csoundness-only\u201d review policy aiming to evaluate only the rigour of an article, not the novelty or significance of the research or its relevance to a particular community, with these elements being left for \u201cthe community to decide\u201d post-publication.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Design\/methodology\/approach<\/jats:title><jats:p>The paper reports the results of interviews with 31 senior publishers and editors representing 16 different organisations, including 10 that publish an OAMJ. Thematic analysis was carried out on the data and an analytical model developed to explicate their significance.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Findings<\/jats:title><jats:p>Findings suggest that in reality criteria beyond technical or scientific soundness can and do influence editorial decisions. Deviations from the original OAMJ model are both publisher supported (in the form of requirements for an article to be \u201cworthy\u201d of publication) and practice driven (in the form of some reviewers and editors applying traditional peer review criteria to OAMJ submissions). Also publishers believe post-publication evaluation of novelty, significance and relevance remains problematic.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Originality\/value<\/jats:title><jats:p>The study is based on unprecedented access to senior publishers and editors, allowing insight into their strategic and operational priorities. The paper is the first to report in-depth qualitative data relating specifically to soundness-only peer review for OAMJs, shedding new light on the OAMJ phenomenon and helping inform discussion on its future role in scholarly communication. The paper proposes a new model for understanding the OAMJ approach to quality assurance, and how it is different from traditional peer review.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1108\/jd-06-2017-0092","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2017,10,24]],"date-time":"2017-10-24T03:31:23Z","timestamp":1508815883000},"page":"137-161","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":44,"title":["\u201cLet the community decide\u201d? The vision and reality of soundness-only peer review in open-access mega-journals"],"prefix":"10.1108","volume":"74","author":[{"given":"Valerie","family":"Spezi","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Simon","family":"Wakeling","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-4696-764X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Stephen","family":"Pinfield","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Jenny","family":"Fry","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Claire","family":"Creaser","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Peter","family":"Willett","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"140","reference":[{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref001","unstructured":"Adams, C. (2011), \u201cPLOS ONE (web log post)\u201d, SPARC website, available at: https:\/\/sparcopen.org\/our-work\/innovator\/plos-one\/ (accessed 10 May 2017)."},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref002","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Binfield, P. (2013), \u201cOpen access megajournals \u2013 have they changed everything? (web log post)\u201d, Creative Commons website, available at: http:\/\/creativecommons.org.nz\/2013\/10\/open-access-megajournals-have-they-changed-everything\/ (accessed 3 January 2017).","DOI":"10.1177\/2158244013507271"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref003","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e981","DOI":"10.7717\/peerj.981","article-title":"Have the \u2018mega-journals\u2019 reached the limits to growth?","volume":"3","year":"2015","journal-title":"PeerJ"},{"issue":"1","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref004","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"9","DOI":"10.1002\/leap.1007","article-title":"Peer review in megajournals compared with traditional scholarly journals: does it make a difference?","volume":"29","year":"2016","journal-title":"Learned Publishing"},{"issue":"2","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref005","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"85","DOI":"10.1087\/20150202","article-title":"Emerging new methods of peer review in scholarly journals","volume":"28","year":"2015","journal-title":"Learned Publishing"},{"issue":"5","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref006","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"378","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1467-9280.2006.01715.x","article-title":"An examination of sources of peer-review bias","volume":"17","year":"2006","journal-title":"Psychological Science"},{"issue":"6154","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref007","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"60","DOI":"10.1126\/science.342.6154.60","article-title":"Who\u2019s afraid of peer review?","volume":"342","year":"2013","journal-title":"Science"},{"issue":"1","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref008","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"197","DOI":"10.1002\/aris.2011.1440450112","article-title":"Scientific peer review","volume":"45","year":"2011","journal-title":"Annual Review of Information Science and Technology"},{"issue":"2","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref009","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"77","DOI":"10.1191\/1478088706qp063oa","article-title":"Using thematic analysis in psychology","volume":"3","year":"2006","journal-title":"Qualitative Research in Psychology"},{"issue":"7","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref010","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2243","DOI":"10.1021\/acs.chemmater.5b01142","article-title":"Mega-journals and peer review: can quality and standards survive?","volume":"27","year":"2015","journal-title":"Chemistry of Materials"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref011","unstructured":"Cope, B. and Phillips, A. (Eds) (2014), The Future of the Academic Journal, 2nd ed., Chandos Publishing, Oxford."},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref012","unstructured":"Epstein, S. (2016), \u201cA few words on sound science, megajournals, and an announcement about SpringerPlus (web log post)\u201d, SpringerOpen Blog, available at: http:\/\/blogs.springeropen.com\/springeropen\/2016\/06\/13\/a-few-words-on-sound-science-megajournals-and-an-announcement-about-springerplus\/ (accessed 12 June 2017)."},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref013","volume-title":"Open Access and the Humanities: Contexts, Controversies and the Future","year":"2014"},{"issue":"3","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref014","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"325","DOI":"10.1890\/0012-9623-91.3.325","article-title":"Pubcreds: Fixing the peer review process by \u2018privatizing\u2019 the reviewer commons","volume":"91","year":"2010","journal-title":"Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref015","unstructured":"Franklin, R. (2010), \u201cPutting peer review on trial\u201d, Physics World, December, p. 17."},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref016","unstructured":"HEFCE (2012), \u201cPanel Criteria and Working Methods. REF 01.2012\u201d, Higher Education Funding Council for England, London, available at: www.ref.ac.uk\/media\/ref\/content\/pub\/panelcriteriaandworkingmethods\/01_12.pdf (accessed 12 June 2017)."},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref017","first-page":"1","article-title":"Do mega-journals constitute the future of scholarly communication?","year":"2017","journal-title":"Educational Philosophy and Theory"},{"issue":"1","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref018","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2","DOI":"10.1002\/asi.22784","article-title":"Bias in peer review","volume":"64","year":"2013","journal-title":"Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology"},{"issue":"4","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref019","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"587","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00826.x","article-title":"Content analysis in mass communication: assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability","volume":"28","year":"2002","journal-title":"Human Communication Research"},{"issue":"1","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref020","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"132","DOI":"10.1002\/asi.22798","article-title":"Peer review in a changing world: an international study measuring the attitudes of researchers","volume":"64","year":"2013","journal-title":"Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology"},{"issue":"1","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref021","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.1087\/20150104","article-title":"Peer review: still king in the digital age","volume":"28","year":"2015","journal-title":"Learned Publishing"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref022","unstructured":"Pattinson, D. (2014), \u201cPLOS ONE publishes its 100,000th article (web log post)\u201d, EveryONE, available at: http:\/\/blogs.plos.org\/everyone\/2014\/06\/23\/plos-one-publishes-100000th-article\/ (accessed 12 June 2017)."},{"issue":"5","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref023","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"604","DOI":"10.1108\/OIR-05-2015-0167","article-title":"Making open access work","volume":"39","year":"2015","journal-title":"Online Information Review"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref024","unstructured":"Procter, R.N., Williams, R. and Stewart, J. (2010), \u201cIf you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use web 2.0\u201d, Research Network Information, London, available at: http:\/\/wrap.warwick.ac.uk\/56246\/1\/WRAP_Procter_If you build it will they come.pdf (accessed 12 June 2017)."},{"issue":"12","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref025","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1651","DOI":"10.1038\/emboj.2013.126","article-title":"Impact fact-or fiction?","volume":"32","year":"2013","journal-title":"The EMBO Journal"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref026","unstructured":"Research Information Network (2015), \u201cScholarly communication and peer review: the current landscape and future trends\u201d, London, available at: https:\/\/s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com\/pstorage-wellcome-4792389547823904\/8149739\/scholarlycommunicationandpeerreviewmar15.pdf (accessed 12 June 2017)."},{"issue":"4","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref027","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"247","DOI":"10.1087\/095315102760319206","article-title":"The peer-review process","volume":"15","year":"2002","journal-title":"Learned Publishing"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref028","article-title":"Guide to referees","year":"2017","journal-title":"Scientific Reports"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref029","unstructured":"Sense About Science (2009), \u201cPeer Review Survey 2009\u201d, London, available at: http:\/\/senseaboutscience.org\/activities\/peer-review-survey-2009\/ (accessed 12 June 2017)."},{"issue":"4","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref030","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"178","DOI":"10.1177\/014107680609900414","article-title":"Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals","volume":"99","year":"2006","journal-title":"Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine"},{"issue":"2","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref031","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"263","DOI":"10.1108\/JD-06-2016-0082","article-title":"Open-access mega-journals: the future of scholarly communication or academic dumping ground? A review","volume":"73","year":"2017","journal-title":"Journal of Documentation"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref032","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Taylor, M. (2015), \u201cWhat are we going to call PLOS ONE-style peer-review?\u201d, Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week, available at: https:\/\/svpow.com\/2015\/04\/24\/what-are-we-going-to-call-plos-one-style-peer-review\/ (accessed 12 June 2017).","DOI":"10.59350\/xqywb-9xe02"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref033","unstructured":"Taylor & Francis (2015), \u201cAuthor services peer review in 2015: a global view\u201d, London, available at: http:\/\/authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com\/peer-review-in-2015\/ (accessed 12 June 2017)."},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref034","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1151","DOI":"10.12688\/f1000research.12037.3","article-title":"A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review","volume":"6","year":"2017","journal-title":"F1000 Research"},{"issue":"5","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref035","article-title":"Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services","volume":"8","year":"2013","journal-title":"PLOS ONE"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref036","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.14293\/S2199-1006.1.SOR-EDU.AYXIPS.v1","article-title":"Peer review \u2013 issues, limitations, and future development","year":"2015","journal-title":"ScienceOpen Research"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref037","article-title":"Open-access mega-journals: the publisher perspective (2) \u2013 operational realities","year":"2017","journal-title":"Learned Publishing"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref038","article-title":"Open-access mega-journals: the publisher perspective (1) \u2013 motivations","year":"2017","journal-title":"Learned Publishing"},{"issue":"11","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref039","article-title":"Open-access mega-journals: a bibliometric profile","volume":"11","year":"2016","journal-title":"PLOS ONE"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref040","volume-title":"Peer Review: Benefits, Perceptions and Alternatives","year":"2008"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref041","volume-title":"Peer Review in Scholarly Journals","year":"2008"},{"issue":"1","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref042","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"23","DOI":"10.1080\/13614576.2011.566812","article-title":"Peer review: recent experience and future directions","volume":"16","year":"2011","journal-title":"New Review of Information Networking"},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref043","unstructured":"Ware, M. and Mabe, M. (2009), \u201cThe STM Report: an overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing\u201d, Oxford, available at: www.stm-assoc.org\/2009_10_13_MWC_STM_Report.pdf (accessed 12 June 2017)."},{"key":"key2020100101172567900_ref044","unstructured":"Ware, M. and Mabe, M. (2015), \u201cThe STM Report\u201d, International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers, The Hague, available at: www.markwareconsulting.com\/the-stm-report\/ (accessed 12 June 2017)."},{"issue":"1","key":"key2020100101172567900_ref045","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"41","DOI":"10.1002\/leap.1002","article-title":"Rewarding reviewers \u2013 sense or sensibility? A Wiley study explained","volume":"29","year":"2016","journal-title":"Learned Publishing"}],"container-title":["Journal of Documentation"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/JD-06-2017-0092\/full\/xml","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/JD-06-2017-0092\/full\/html","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,24]],"date-time":"2025-07-24T22:34:15Z","timestamp":1753396455000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.emerald.com\/jd\/article\/74\/1\/137-161\/207751"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2018,1,8]]},"references-count":45,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,1,8]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1108\/JD-06-2017-0092"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1108\/jd-06-2017-0092","relation":{},"ISSN":["0022-0418"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0022-0418","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2018,1,8]]}}}