IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2011-52-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Simulation That 'Peers into Peer Review'

Author

Abstract

This article suggests to view peer review as a social interaction problem and shows reasons for social simulators to investigate it. Although essential for science, peer review is largely understudied and current attempts to reform it are not supported by scientific evidence. We suggest that there is room for social simulation to fill this gap by spotlighting social mechanisms behind peer review at the microscope and understanding their implications for the science system. In particular, social simulation could help to understand why voluntary peer review works at all, explore the relevance of social sanctions and reputational motives to increase the commitment of agents involved, cast light on the economic cost of this institution for the science system and understand the influence of signals and social networks in determining biases in the reviewing process. Finally, social simulation could help to test policy scenarios to maximise the efficacy and efficiency of various peer review schemes under specific circumstances and for everyone involved.

Suggested Citation

  • Flaminio Squazzoni & Károly Takács, 2011. "Social Simulation That 'Peers into Peer Review'," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(4), pages 1-3.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2011-52-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/14/4/3/3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Axelrod, Robert, 1986. "An Evolutionary Approach to Norms," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(4), pages 1095-1111, December.
    2. Lutz Bornmann & Hans-Dieter Daniel, 2005. "Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review. Reliability, fairness and predictive validity of Board of Trustees' decisions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 63(2), pages 297-320, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Squazzoni, Flaminio & Bravo, Giangiacomo & Takács, Károly, 2013. "Does incentive provision increase the quality of peer review? An experimental study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 287-294.
    2. Federico Bianchi & Francisco Grimaldo & Giangiacomo Bravo & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2018. "The peer review game: an agent-based model of scientists facing resource constraints and institutional pressures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1401-1420, September.
    3. Vladimir Batagelj & Anuška Ferligoj & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2017. "The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 503-532, October.
    4. Simone Righi & Károly Takács, 2017. "The miracle of peer review and development in science: an agent-based model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 587-607, October.
    5. Maciej J Mrowinski & Piotr Fronczak & Agata Fronczak & Marcel Ausloos & Olgica Nedic, 2017. "Artificial intelligence in peer review: How can evolutionary computation support journal editors?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-11, September.
    6. Mario Paolucci & Francisco Grimaldo, 2014. "Mechanism change in a simulation of peer review: from junk support to elitism," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 663-688, June.
    7. Maciej J. Mrowinski & Agata Fronczak & Piotr Fronczak & Olgica Nedic & Marcel Ausloos, 2016. "Review time in peer review: quantitative analysis and modelling of editorial workflows," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(1), pages 271-286, April.
    8. Squazzoni, Flaminio & Gandelli, Claudio, 2012. "Saint Matthew strikes again: An agent-based model of peer review and the scientific community structure," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 265-275.

    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. H Peyton Young, 2014. "The Evolution of Social Norms," Economics Series Working Papers 726, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    2. Fischer, Ilan & Sullivan, Oriel, 2007. "Evolutionary modeling of time-use vectors," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 120-143, January.
    3. Runolfsson Solvason Birgir T., 1992. "Ordered Anarchy: Evolution Of The Decentralized Legal Order In The Icelandic Commonwealth," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2-3), pages 333-352, June.
    4. Albert Banal-Estañol & Qianshuo Liu & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2021. "Similar-to-me Effects in the Grant Application Process: Applicants, Panelists, and the Likelihood of Obtaining Funds," Working Papers 1289, Barcelona School of Economics.
    5. Olav Schram Stokke, 1990. "The Northern Environment: Is Cooperation Coming?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 512(1), pages 58-68, November.
    6. Jung-Kyoo Choi, 2008. "Play locally, learn globally: group selection and structural basis of cooperation," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 239-257, December.
    7. Licht Amir N., 2008. "Social Norms and the Law: Why Peoples Obey the Law," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(3), pages 715-750, December.
    8. Michael T Gastner & Károly Takács & Máté Gulyás & Zsuzsanna Szvetelszky & Beáta Oborny, 2019. "The impact of hypocrisy on opinion formation: A dynamic model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-21, June.
    9. Mauricio G. Villena & Marcelo J. Villena, 2004. "Evolutionary Game Theory and Thorstein Veblen’s Evolutionary Economics: Is EGT Veblenian?," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 585-610, September.
    10. Andrew W. Bausch, 2014. "Evolving intergroup cooperation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 369-393, December.
    11. Diana Escandon-Barbosa & David Urbano-Pulido & Andrea Hurtado-Ayala, 2019. "Exploring the Relationship between Formal and Informal Institutions, Social Capital, and Entrepreneurial Activity in Developing and Developed Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, January.
    12. Craig A. Depken & Peter A. Groothuis & Mark C. Strazicich, 2020. "Evolution Of Community Deterrence: Evidence From The National Hockey League," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 38(2), pages 289-303, April.
    13. Matt Parrett, 2006. "An Analysis of the Determinants of Tipping Behavior: A Laboratory Experiment and Evidence from Restaurant Tipping," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 73(2), pages 489-514, October.
    14. Hanatani, Atsushi & Fuse, Kana, 2010. "Linking Resource Users’ Perceptions and Collective Action in Commons Management," Working Papers 24, JICA Research Institute.
    15. Antoci, Angelo & Galeotti, Marcello & Russu, Paolo & Zarri, Luca, 2006. "Generalized trust and sustainable coexistence between socially responsible firms and nonprofit organizations," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 783-802.
    16. Истратов В.А., 2018. "Компьютерный Алгоритм Формирования Личных И Социальных Норм," Журнал Экономика и математические методы (ЭММ), Центральный Экономико-Математический Институт (ЦЭМИ), vol. 54(4), pages 98-110, октябрь.
    17. Viktor J. Vanberg, 2013. "Cooperation in multilateral PDs: self-selected vs pre-defined groups," Chapters, in: Francisco Cabrillo & Miguel A. Puchades-Navarro (ed.), Constitutional Economics and Public Institutions, chapter 15, pages 279-296, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Alexander Field, 2008. "Why multilevel selection matters," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 203-238, December.
    19. Chien Liu, 2020. "A theory of norm collapse," Rationality and Society, , vol. 32(2), pages 119-143, May.
    20. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.

    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:jas:jasssj:2011-52-1. 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.

    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: Francesco Renzini (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.