IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v12y2024i4p40-d1516753.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blockchain and Its Application in the Peer Review of Scientific Works: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Cristian Hugo Morales-Alarcón

    (Programa Oficial de Doctorado en Análisis Económico y Estrategia Empresarial, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de La Coruña, La Coruña-España 060104, Ecuador)

  • Elba Bodero-Poveda

    (Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo (UNACH), Riobamba 060101, Ecuador)

  • Henry Mauricio Villa-Yánez

    (Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Administrativas, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo (UNACH), Riobamba 060101, Ecuador)

  • Pamela Alexandra Buñay-Guisñan

    (Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo (UNACH), Riobamba 060101, Ecuador)

Abstract

Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology that ensures the security and transparency of data, guaranteeing that they cannot be altered. Its application in the peer review of scientific papers can contribute to improving the integrity, transparency, and efficiency of the process, mitigating issues of manipulation and fraud. This work analyzes the contributions of various research studies that address the use of blockchain technology in peer review. The study is a systematic literature review (SLR) in which the PRISMA methodology was applied. Fifty primary studies were identified through searches in databases such as Scopus, Science Direct, IEEE Xplore, and ACM. The analyzed research reveals innovative approaches, such as decentralized solutions, smart contracts, and token economy, to address challenges like biases, transparency, and speed in the review process. It is concluded that the use of blockchain in peer review processes is still emerging and has not yet been widely adopted globally. However, studies addressing this topic focus on its potential to improve transparency and trust in the process, offer incentives and rewards to reviewers and authors, enhance the quality and fairness of evaluations, and strengthen the security and privacy of the data involved.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristian Hugo Morales-Alarcón & Elba Bodero-Poveda & Henry Mauricio Villa-Yánez & Pamela Alexandra Buñay-Guisñan, 2024. "Blockchain and Its Application in the Peer Review of Scientific Works: A Systematic Review," Publications, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-19, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:12:y:2024:i:4:p:40-:d:1516753
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/12/4/40/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/12/4/40/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ying He & Kun Tian & Xiaoran Xu, 2023. "A validation study on the factors affecting the practice modes of open peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 587-607, January.
    2. Michael Spearpoint, 2017. "A Proposed Currency System for Academic Peer Review Payments Using the BlockChain Technology," Publications, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-6, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wenqing Wu & Haixu Xi & Chengzhi Zhang, 2024. "Are the confidence scores of reviewers consistent with the review content? Evidence from top conference proceedings in AI," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 4109-4135, July.
    2. Dulani Jayasuriya Daluwathumullagamage & Alexandra Sims, 2021. "Fantastic Beasts: Blockchain Based Banking," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-43, April.

    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:gam:jpubli:v:12:y:2024:i:4:p:40-:d:1516753. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.