I.3. Power and Institutions

Forum rules

This group's draft report will be posted soon. In the meantime we welcome additional contributions to the stage 2 threads below Please register and log in prior to posting, unless you prefer to post anonymously (i.e. without having your post be attributed to you). Anonymous posts will display only after a delay to allow for administrator review. Contributors agree to the QTD Terms of Use.

Instructions
To participate, you may either post a contribution to an existing discussion by selecting the thread for that topic (and then click on "Post Reply") or start a new thread by clicking on "New Topic" below.

For instructions on how to follow a discussion thread by email, click here.

Sherrill Stroschein
University College London
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 4:48 pm

Reviewer gets files, disappears

PostWed Nov 30, 2016 6:33 am

We recently secured a reviewer on a niche piece with few potential reviewers. While our journal does not have a policy on DA-RT (for reasons of this forum) this particular piece was database-focused. When the reviewer requested all of the prior materials, referencing DA-RT, we contacted the author about this to see if they had any objections to providing the material, and we supplied it to the reviewer.

Much time has gone by. We are now in the process of trying to find another reviewer, as this one has disappeared. Most likely, this is no different from other reviewer disappearences. But what if it is not? What if that reviewer is busy using the materials themselves? Unlkely, perhaps, but possible. We as journal editors would feel somewhat responsible if this were the case, and of course we would supply all of this information in the event that the material was used inappropriatey. But this would be far after the fact, and only if it was brought to our attention.

Relating to qualitative research, the problems are even more serious. What if the piece were about Kurds in Turkey, and a reviewer had requested the materials? What if this had happened in May or even June this year (2016), and what if a journal had required these materials and sent them to a reviewer? What if, post-July and the government crackdown, that reviewer were comprimised by the fear that they could be fired or arrested by the state, and gave over these materials to show loyalty to the government? What if certain Kurdish individuals could be identified (or mis-identifed) by police in this move, and thus arrested? While this might seem an extreme example, this is a possible scenario in the current context.

I have not seen signs that these potential problems have come up in the DA-RT discussions. There are instead a set of assumptions that reviewers will always be operating on the same principles as those behind DA-RT, and that all share the same goal of the pursuit of transparency. One would hope that journal editors could guard against reviewer misuse of these files, but as editors we cannot know all of those individuals that we contact to review. We lose control over these files when they are requested. Moreover, it can be very difficult for authors to ask for an exception if they are under strong pressure to publish. There should be more consideration of these practical problems among DA-RT advocates, rather than just a reliance on assumed behavior and motives.

Post Reply


Return to “I.3. Power and Institutions”