Philosophy On The SciRev Journal Reviewing Site
SciRev is a multidisciplinary website for researchers to share their experiences with various journals so they can select not just appropriate but also efficient venues for their work. It is run by a pair of economics professors. They describe the aim of the site this way:
Efficient journals get credits for their efforts to improve their review process and the way they handle manuscripts. Less efficient journals are stimulated to put energy in organizing things better. Researchers can search for a journal with a speedy review procedure and have their papers published earlier. Editors get the opportunity to compare their journal’s performance with that of others and to provide information about their journal at our website. SciRev aims to help science by making the peer review process more efficient.
A philosophy professor recently received an invitation to join the site. He writes:
It looks like a professionally done website, but as of now, there are only a few reports in the philosophy section (although the philosophy journal list is pretty comprehensive). Given some of the discussion on Daily Nous, it would seem like it would be interesting what people in the profession think about this project.
Here’s the top of SciRev’s list of philosophy journals, listed in order of number of reviews:
At the time of this post, only eight journals have more than one review; twenty-six have 1 review each. A lot of journals are listed, but some are missing. If this is to become a valuable resource, people will have to start submitting reviews of journals.
Readers may be familiar with Andrew Cullison’s Journal Surveys page. In 2015 the American Philosophical Association (APA) and British Philosophical Association (BPA) published similar material for some journals. I can’t tell how actively updated these surveys are (those in the know, please comment). Would SciRev be a valuable additional source of information? Do you plan on submitting information to it?
The philosophy professor who wrote in added this:
What gave me pause while I was about to sign up was the following option in the sign up process: “SciRev is currently setting up a paid peer review system. If you would be interested in participating as a paid referee, please let us know by checking the box below.” I don’t have a settled opinion on this either way, but it might be worth discussing.
I don’t have further information about the paid peer review system at this time.
This seems to me a great website. SciRev’s review questions for each journal are more detailed and helpful than Cullison’s. And the site is more user-friendly.
I happen to like the idea of paid refereeing (although I don’t know how exactly SciRev plans to do it), because it could help speed up the reviewing process, and because it seems unjust that big publishers should make a profit by exploiting the volunteer labor of academics. I understand that there are disadvantages to paid refereeing, but you don’t have to check SciRev’s box in order to register. If you think that paid refereeing is bad, then you can and should sign up for SciRev without checking the box. If enough people do this, maybe they won’t pursue the idea. It’s clear from this page (https://scirev.sc/pprtermsandconditions/) that the idea is still quite half-baked.