Blog

Open Research practices that prioritise openness and transparency are becoming increasingly common in academic publishing. Traditional peer review often happens behind closed doors, but new models are making reviewer names, reports, and research data available to everyone. The shift to open data can help address concerns about the reproducibility of research. When more of the publishing process is open, researchers can better judge the quality and trustworthiness of published work. This move toward transparency is creating new opportunities for academics to collaborate and engage in insightful discussions about research.

In the following blog post, we examine how various aspects of the open model used by HRB Open Research can help researchers maintain academic integrity in their research.

The Transparency of Open Peer Review

Transparency is put at the forefront of the publishing model used by HRB Open Research. This includes in the peer review process. The peer review process takes place after publication, and is fully transparent, as the model uses open identities, open peer review reports and an open user commenting system. This means that reviewer feedback, author responses, and the identities of everyone involved in the process can be viewed by anyone reading the article.

Open Identities

Reviewer names and affiliations are published alongside the article meaning that all reviewers are publicly accountable for their feedback. This can encourage reviewers to produce higher quality, more constructive peer review reports. Open identities also ensure that all reviewers will receive credit for their contributions. This aspect of open peer review is very important for cases of co-reviewing, which often involves early-career researchers.

Open Peer Review Reports

Peer review reports are also published alongside the article for anyone to read. This way, readers can better understand the logic and thinking process of reviewers. Open reports also give context to why a paper might be controversial or why there are conflicting views. 

Open Commenting

Open commenting systems provide an opportunity for other researchers to comment on a research article, and start discussions with the authors and reviewers, at any stage of the peer review process. This system makes peer review a more constructive, collaborative conversation within the research community by allowing readers to leave feedback without being a part of the formal review process. By allowing open commenting, there is a greater degree of transparent communication between authors and reviewers. Authors can openly respond to any comments, including those left by reviewers, further increasing the transparency of the peer review process.

Open Data Supports Greater Transparency and Reproducibility 

Making all underlying data openly available is a prerequisite to publishing with HRB Open Research. Open data is a core element of our publishing model. Before an article is published, our editorial team checks that authors have shared their data in an open format. But why do we place so much value on open data? 

Greater Transparency

Data availability and access play a crucial role in transparent science. Data sharing nurtures transparency, allowing researchers to check the authenticity of reported results. Such transparency can help minimise the spreading of fabricated or falsified data.   

Plus, making data openly available accelerates discovery and reduces research waste. Researchers avoid the time-consuming and costly process of generating data from scratch. Instead, they can reuse available datasets for their own projects. Scholars with different skills or expertise can even use data in ways that the original creator had not envisioned.  

Supporting Reproducibility

Making research data openly available allows testing of its reproducibility. Reproducibility refers to the extent to which a researcher can obtain consistent results with high reliability using the same data or code as the original study. In this sense, reproducibility can drive and support greater trust in research.  

Replicating studies can show that the research and its methods are robust. Plus, it can uncover errors or even invalidate faulty methods. This can prevent the dissemination of questionable research to the wider research community.  

The shift toward transparent publishing practices represents a meaningful step forward for the academic community. By embracing Open Research methods — from public peer review to accessible data sharing — publishers and researchers are working together to enhance scientific integrity. Learn more about Open Data and Open Peer Review on HRB Open Research