IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v13y2020i1p1-27_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Supporting robust, rigorous, and reliable reviewing as the cornerstone of our profession: Introducing a competency framework for peer review

Author

Listed:
  • Köhler, Tine
  • González-Morales, M. Gloria
  • Banks, George C.
  • O’Boyle, Ernest H.
  • Allen, Joseph A.
  • Sinha, Ruchi
  • Woo, Sang Eun
  • Gulick, Lisa M. V.

Abstract

Peer review is a critical component toward facilitating a robust science in industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology. Peer review exists beyond academic publishing in organizations, university departments, grant agencies, classrooms, and many more work contexts. Reviewers are responsible for judging the quality of research conducted and submitted for evaluation. Furthermore, they are responsible for treating authors and their work with respect, in a supportive and developmental manner. Given its central role in our profession, it is curious that we do not have formalized review guidelines or standards and that most of us never receive formal training in peer reviewing. To support this endeavor, we are proposing a competency framework for peer review. The purpose of the competency framework is to provide a definition of excellent peer reviewing and guidelines to reviewers for which types of behaviors will lead to good peer reviews. By defining these competencies, we create clarity around expectations for peer review, standards for good peer reviews, and opportunities for training the behaviors required to deliver good peer reviews. We further discuss how the competency framework can be used to improve peer reviewing and suggest additional steps forward that involve suggestions for how stakeholders can get involved in fostering high-quality peer reviewing.

Suggested Citation

  • Köhler, Tine & González-Morales, M. Gloria & Banks, George C. & O’Boyle, Ernest H. & Allen, Joseph A. & Sinha, Ruchi & Woo, Sang Eun & Gulick, Lisa M. V., 2020. "Supporting robust, rigorous, and reliable reviewing as the cornerstone of our profession: Introducing a competency framework for peer review," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:1-27_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942619001214/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li Yan & Wang Zhiping, 2023. "Mapping the Literature on Academic Publishing: A Bibliometric Analysis on WOS," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440231, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:1-27_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.