Mentored Reviewer Perspectives on Peer-Reviewing Proposals and Manuscripts (Poster 14)

• In Event: Saturday Poster Session 9:35 am
  In Poster Session: Division I Poster Session

Abstract

This study compared the peer review process for externally funded research proposals and journal manuscripts from the perspective of reviewers participating in a mentored reviewer program. To understand how the tacit criteria they used to determine quality or value of scholarship differed for proposal review and manuscript review, themes were extracted from transcripts of a focus group interview with three participants. Themes included differences in the structure and focus of reviews, level of detail provided in reviews and nature of communication with authors, and similarities in terms of the need for feedback to the authors to be constructive and aligned with recommendations to program officers and journal editors. This information can help develop more inclusive and constructive peer review practices.

Authors

• Lisa Benson, Clemson University

• Rebecca Bates, Minnesota State University - Mankato

• Randi Sims, Clemson University

• Evan Ko, University of Michigan

• Gary Lichtenstein, Quality Evaluation Designs

• Karin J. Jensen, University of Michigan