* Correspondence: w.halffman@ science.ru.nl Institute for Science in Society, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Peer review at research journals is going through a period of intense innovation. Some journals are experimenting with ‘open’ review procedures that reveal identities or even review reports; some with pre-registered reports that shift review attention to experimental protocols rather than to focus on results; or with post-publication review through readership commentary [1]. Well-resourced journals embed peer review in editorial review procedures that may include text similarity scanners, language, or reference checks, or that involve low-wage sub-contracting of editorial work in highly distributed procedures. With increasing IT support and editorial division of labour, peer review is but one link in the chain that guards, selects and improves manuscript quality, as part of editorial procedures that are now more diverse than ever—even though the majority of research journals still uses fairly standard peer review procedures and more radical innovations are limited to a few research niches [2]. How can we learn from all these innovations?

中文翻译：

---

同行评审和编辑评估的创新是什么？

* 通讯作者：w.halffman@science.ru.nl 社会科学研究所，Radboud 大学奈梅亨，奈梅亨，荷兰 研究期刊的同行评审正在经历一个激烈的创新时期。一些期刊正在试验“开放”审查程序，以揭示身份甚至审查报告；一些带有预先注册的报告，将审查注意力转移到实验方案而不是结果上；或通过读者评论进行发表后审查 [1]。资源丰富的期刊在编辑评审程序中嵌入了同行评审，这些程序可能包括文本相似性扫描、语言或参考检查，或者在高度分散的程序中涉及低工资的编辑工作分包。随着越来越多的IT支持和编辑分工，同行评审只是保护、选择和提高稿件质量的链条中的一个环节，作为现在比以往任何时候都更加多样化的编辑程序的一部分——尽管大多数研究期刊仍然使用相当标准的同行评审程序并且更激进的创新是仅限于少数研究领域 [2]。我们如何从所有这些创新中学习？