Peer review of academic manuscripts is essential to maintain integrity in science and is integral to the journal publication process. Early Career Researchers (ECRs) often contribute to this peer review process. While ECRs may review manuscripts jointly with or under the direction of a senior academic, such as a Principal Investigator (PI), Group Leader, or Professor, a large number of ECRs claimed in a recent survey to have acted as peer review “ghostwriters”; that is, the peer review report (i.e. the final review submitted to the journal editor) had only the senior academic’s name attributed to the report. For the rest of this survey, we refer to the senior academic as the “PI” and any junior academics under their supervision as “ECRs.” This survey is designed to collect more data about the phenomenon of ghostwriting by ECRs. The goal of this survey is to assess the experiences and opinions of the community, and to recommend best practices for recognizing co-reviewing activities.
This survey contains 16 questions and is estimated to take 15 minutes.