Spotting potential reviewers for interdisciplinary research: insights on active reviewers from Publons

Lin Zhang (), Ziyi Tu, Yifei Yu, Yuanyuan Shang and Ying Huang
Additional contact information
Lin Zhang: Wuhan University
Ziyi Tu: Wuhan University
Yifei Yu: Wuhan University
Yuanyuan Shang: Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Evaluation Studies
Ying Huang: Wuhan University

Scientometrics, 2024, vol. 129, issue 9, No 18, 5533-5556

Abstract: Abstract The increasing significance of interdisciplinary research poses a challenge in evaluating its quality and emphasizes the need for academic journals to choose appropriate reviewers for interdisciplinary research. Several studies have focused on the problems in reviewing interdisciplinary research, but fewer studies on the challenges of recruiting suitable reviewers for interdisciplinary research. Our study collects a specific group of active interdisciplinary reviewers who were awarded the “Top 1% reviewers in Cross-field” by Publons—a recognition for reviewers conducting the highest number of reviews in corresponding fields. We aim to examine the interdisciplinary backgrounds and intrinsic interactivity of these active interdisciplinary reviewers in various academic activities, alongside exploring the countries, institutions, and research fields they represent. Our findings shed light on the uneven distribution of active interdisciplinary reviewers among countries and institutions. We also observe that active interdisciplinary reviewers often possess high interdisciplinarity in their research activities, and this interdisciplinarity increases as their reviewing and research experience grows. Notably, moderately experienced reviewers (with 6–10 years of reviewing experience) are the primary force of active interdisciplinary reviewers. We also advocate for inviting reviewers with varied levels of research and reviewing experience commensurate with the interdisciplinarity or complexity of the research. Moreover, active interdisciplinary reviewers demonstrate a strong disciplinary similarity and correlation among their research, reviewing, and editorial activities. Given the mounting pressure and challenges associated with reviewing interdisciplinary research, we propose several recommendations based on our analysis.

Keywords: Interdisciplinary reviewer; Active reviewers; Reviewer selection; Interdisciplinary research; Publons (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-05129-6 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:9:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05129-6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192

DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-05129-6

Access Statistics for this article

Scientometrics is currently edited by Wolfgang Glänzel

More articles in Scientometrics from Springer, Akadémiai Kiadó
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().