Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCooke, SJen
dc.contributor.authorNguyen, VMen
dc.contributor.authorWilson, ADMen
dc.contributor.authorDonaldson, MRen
dc.contributor.authorGallagher, AJen
dc.contributor.authorHammerschlag, Nen
dc.contributor.authorHaddaway, NRen

© The authors 2016. Scholarly peer review relies on rigorous yet fair assessments of articles by qualified referees in a timely manner. We considered the extent to which a prolonged peer-review process can delay the dissemination of results in a conservation context by combining insight from a survey with our own perspectives. A survey of authors who published peer-reviewed articles in biodiversity and conservation in 2012 and 2013 yielded 461 responses from participants in 119 countries. Approximately 44% of respondents thought that slow review times might hamper conservation, while only ~5% provided specific examples of how slow reviews had actually impeded conservation actions or policy formation. When queried about the value of expediting the review process for studies of high policy or conservation relevance, ca. 1/3 of respondents thought it was a worthwhile idea in principle, though mechanics of implementing such practices are unclear. Author self-identification of potentially important papers could lead to requesting a rapid review provided that a paper meets certain criteria-an approach already used by some generalist journals. Given the urgency of many conservation-oriented initiatives, we encourage the entire editor - ial team (staff, editors, referees, authors) to make a concerted effort towards improving the speed of the peer-review process while maintaining quality. Such efforts would reflect the notion that timeliness is a key component of scientific relevance to practitioners and policy makers in a crisis discipline. We conclude that there is a 'need for speed' and advocate that rapid, rigorous and thorough peer review can be accomplished and can provide collective benefits to the scientific community and global biodiversity.

dc.format.extent11 - 18en
dc.titleThe need for speed in a crisis discipline: Perspectives on peer-review duration and implications for conservation scienceen
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.journalEndangered Species Researchen
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/00 Groups by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/00 Groups by role/Academics
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health and Human Sciences
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health and Human Sciences/School of Psychology
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Science and Engineering
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Science and Engineering/School of Biological and Marine Sciences
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA07 Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences
dc.rights.embargoperiodNo embargoen
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
@mire NV