Elsevier announced the launch of PeerChoice, a new pilot peer review program for Chemical Physics Letters where reviewers now have the freedom to choose which articles they would like to review. By choosing articles matching their expertise and interest, efficiency and effectiveness of the peer review process will be increased. The PeerChoice pilot will initially run for three months, starting in June.
PeerChoice reverses the traditional model in which the Editor selects articles for a reviewer to review. Using high-end software, the reviewer will be able to select the article that matches his academic competency and current interest, while committing to a timely review. This will significantly increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the review process. Current checks and balances in the peer review process remain in place to ensure the usual high quality of the process.
"We aim to support the research community in the fundamentally important task of peer review in scientific publication," remarked Martin Tanke, Managing Director of Elsevier's Science and Technology Journals. "That's why we're continuously looking for new, innovative ways to enhance the peer review process. By developing new technologies, but also by listening to the needs of our reviewers and authors - the 2009 Peer Review Survey, which we conducted with our partner Sense About Science, showed that a significant number of reviewers were sometimes hesitant to review an article because of a lack of expertise in that particular field. In addition, researchers made clear they want to improve peer review by improving article relevancy and speeding up turnaround time. PeerChoice can contribute to solving both issues."
Professor David Clary, Editor of Chemical Physics Letters, said, "The community of authors, reviewers and editors for Chemical Physics Letters is a dynamic and engaged one, and as such, the perfect environment to experiment with a new empowerment model in which reviewers can choose to review online the articles most interesting and relevant for them."
Source: http://www.elsevier.com/