Although peer review is crucial for innovation and experimental discoveries in science, it is poorly understood in scientific terms. Discovering its true dynamics and exploring adjustments which improve the commitment of everyone involved could benefit scientific development for all disciplines and consequently increase innovation in the economy and the society. We have reported the results of an innovative experiment developed to model peer review. We demonstrate that offering material rewards to referees tends to decrease the quality and efficiency of the reviewing process. Our findings help to discuss the viability of different options of incentive provision, supporting the idea that journal editors and responsible of research funding agencies should be extremely careful in offering material incentives on reviewing, since these might undermine moral motives which guide referees' behavior.

Does incentive provision increase the quality of peer review? : An experimental study / F. Squazzoni, G. Bravo, K. Takacs. - In: RESEARCH POLICY. - ISSN 0048-7333. - 42:1(2013), pp. 287-294.

Does incentive provision increase the quality of peer review? : An experimental study

F. Squazzoni
;
2013

Abstract

Although peer review is crucial for innovation and experimental discoveries in science, it is poorly understood in scientific terms. Discovering its true dynamics and exploring adjustments which improve the commitment of everyone involved could benefit scientific development for all disciplines and consequently increase innovation in the economy and the society. We have reported the results of an innovative experiment developed to model peer review. We demonstrate that offering material rewards to referees tends to decrease the quality and efficiency of the reviewing process. Our findings help to discuss the viability of different options of incentive provision, supporting the idea that journal editors and responsible of research funding agencies should be extremely careful in offering material incentives on reviewing, since these might undermine moral motives which guide referees' behavior.
Science policy; Peer review; Cooperation; Trust; Reputation
Settore SPS/07 - Sociologia Generale
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
SquazzoniBravoTakacs2013ResearchPolicy.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 520.72 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
520.72 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/2434/626195
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 50
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 50
social impact