Skip to content

Added documentation for the triple anonymous peer review system#4434

Merged
mauromsl merged 5 commits into
r-v1.7.xfrom
b-4426-document-triple-anon
Oct 1, 2024
Merged

Added documentation for the triple anonymous peer review system#4434
mauromsl merged 5 commits into
r-v1.7.xfrom
b-4426-document-triple-anon

Conversation

@ajrbyers

@ajrbyers ajrbyers commented Oct 1, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Closes #4426

@ajrbyers ajrbyers requested a review from S-Haime October 1, 2024 09:39
@ajrbyers ajrbyers added the documentation Ideas for new or improved user documentation label Oct 1, 2024
Signed-off-by: Siobhan <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Siobhan <[email protected]>

@S-Haime S-Haime left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Made some changes to language, otherwise no immediate issues. Will review and edit in more depth as part of Documentation project.

@S-Haime

S-Haime commented Oct 1, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Cannae find the original PR, but we may also need a 'quiet' notification to Editors when a Section-Editor assigns the Author as Reviewers in triple anonymous. The Author is ofc also blocked from doing the review (I checked) and if 1-click review is not enabled, they cannot decline. If they do have 1-click access, they can review their own paper and accept it. It throws a server error, but the decision goes through! The section editor would have no way of knowing about this. So a) the (managing) Editor ought to be notified to keep an eye on this and ensure the author declines to review without informing the section-editor of the reason why and b) to ensure this does not happen and slip through the cracks.

Not immediately urgent as F&E won't have this issue, but for potential future use.

Sentry is being nasty to me, so I cannae check what the error was.

@S-Haime

S-Haime commented Oct 1, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Actually we DEFINITELY need an alert and a half if Authors do ever review their own work (as it would be easy to overlook in a journal with a large number of articles in review - on the overview you'd only see initials, so you'd have to open the article review page to check whilst having the correct permissions).

@ajrbyers

ajrbyers commented Oct 1, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Actually we DEFINITELY need an alert and a half if Authors do ever review their own work (as it would be easy to overlook in a journal with a large number of articles in review - on the overview you'd only see initials, so you'd have to open the article review page to check whilst having the correct permissions).

When triple anon is enabled perhaps we should just filter out the authors from the reviewer list?

@mauromsl mauromsl changed the base branch from master to r-v1.7.x October 1, 2024 13:57
@mauromsl mauromsl merged commit 32a65f6 into r-v1.7.x Oct 1, 2024
@mauromsl mauromsl deleted the b-4426-document-triple-anon branch October 1, 2024 13:57
@S-Haime

S-Haime commented Oct 2, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Actually we DEFINITELY need an alert and a half if Authors do ever review their own work (as it would be easy to overlook in a journal with a large number of articles in review - on the overview you'd only see initials, so you'd have to open the article review page to check whilst having the correct permissions).

When triple anon is enabled perhaps we should just filter out the authors from the reviewer list?

I considered that, but it would give the game away to the section editor.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

documentation Ideas for new or improved user documentation

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Write documentation for triple-anonymous review

3 participants