Sir
Eugene Koonin's suggestion in Correspondence (Nature 422, 374; 200310.1038/422374c) that a journal should reward swift peer-reviewers by equally swiftly processing any articles that they themselves submit is an interesting one. Perhaps the converse should apply too: submissions from those who persistently underperform as reviewers should have their own work reviewed on a slower timescale.
An alternative reward system for good reviewers can be used in the open-access model of publishing, in which authors of accepted articles pay a processing charge so that there are no subscription or access charges to the journal. In this model, swift reviewers can be rewarded by a reduction in this charge. A twist is applied by some journals published by Berkeley Electronic Press (http://www.bepress.com), in which submitting authors do not have to pay the processing charge if they contract to provide a timely review of an agreed number of papers. But they do have to provide credit-card details and are subsequently charged if they fail to deliver their reviews on time.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Newmark, P. Peer review and the rewards of open access. Nature 422, 661 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1038/422661b
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/422661b