The 2nd PEERE International Conference on Peer Review 2020 will be celebrated as a fully open virtual event on 29 September – 1 October 2020.

A repository of video presentations and live streaming sessions will be available at https://underline.io. Just create an account and enjoy the conference for free!

Pre-recorded talks about accepted contributions will be made public on 28 September distributed in different thematic tracks, so they can be consumed on-demand and discussed during the following query and answer sessions:

Tuesday, 29 September 2020

Venue: Conference site on Underline (create your account for free)

14:00 – 15:00 (CET)	Keynote talk: Sara Schroter (BMJ) Researching peer review in biomedical journals: more collaborative cross-journal research is needed
15:00 – 16:00 (CET)	Q&A Session 1: Peer review procedures & trials Chair: Bahar Mehmani, Elsevier Journal guidelines: What they can and cannot do. Serge Horbach, Wytske Hepkema, Joyce Hoek and Willem Halffman. Effect of an editorial intervention to improve the completeness of reporting of randomised trials: a randomised controlled trial. David Blanco, Sara Schroter, Adrian Aldcroft, David Moher, Isabelle Boutron, Jamie Kirkham and Erik Cobo. Results from a peer-review trial at eLife. Emma Smith and Andy Collings. Do Words Matter? Increasing buy-in by building trust with peer reviewers on Publons and ORCID. Imogen Rose, Katie Allin, Uwe Schwab, Matthew Hayes and Edmund Gerstner. A peer review programme for mental health service users. Joan Marsh, Niall Boyce and Vanessa Pinfold.
16:00 – 16:15 (CET)	Break
16:15 – 17:30 (CET)	Q&A Session 2: Peer review metrics and data analysis Chair: Mario Malički, Stanford University Who reviews for predatory and legitimate journals? A study on reviewer characteristics. Anna Severin, Michaela Strinzel, Marc Domingo and Tiago Barros. Man, senior, targeting prestigious journals: Is this the identikit of the big fish in the peer review pond? An empirical study on 157 scholarly journals. Mike Farjam, Giangiacomo Bravo, Francisco Grimaldo, Flaminio Squazzoni. Peer review of doctoral dissertations: Gender differences in getting cum laude. Peter Van Den Besselaar, Charlie Mom and Tijs Van den Broek. Peer reviewers’ opinions: low agreement in every dimension of internally consistent reports. Judith Hartstein. Metrics and peer review agreement at the institutional level. Vincent Antonio Traag, Marco Malgarini and Scipione Sarlo. Tracking the developmental value of peer review in a sample of scholarly journals from the Royal Society, 2006-2016. Daniel Garcia-Costa, Federico Bianchi, Francisco Grimaldo, Phil Hurst, Flaminio Squazzoni.

Wednesday, 30 September 2020

Venue: Conference site on Underline (create your account for free)

14:00 – 15:00 (CET)	Panel Session 1: Remodeling peer review in light of preprints Organizer: ​Jessica Polka, Executive Director, ASAPbio Panelists: Emily Chenette (PLOS), Marjolaine Hamelin (INRAE), Sowmya Swaminathan (Springer Nature), Sara Monado (EMBO)
15:00 – 16:00 (CET)	Q&A Session 3: Peering into peer review Chair: Peter Van Den Besselaar, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam A standard taxonomy for peer review: presentation of the final version. Joris van Rossum. Investigation of moral bias in peer review using large-scale linguistic analysis approach. Ivan Buljan, Daniel Garcia-Costa, Francisco Grimaldo, Flaminio Squazzoni and Ana Marušić. Changing the shoulders I am standing on! Describing the changes that occurred in publications’ reference lists after peer review. Aliakbar Akbaritabar, Dimity Stephen, Judith Hartstein and Christophe Heger. Psychometric testing of ARCADIA, a tool for assessing peer review report quality in biomedical research. Cecilia Superchi, Ketevan Glonti, Sara Schroter, Josep Anton Sànchez Espigares, Alessandro Recchioni, Darko Hren, Isabelle Boutron and José Antonio González. Are public comments on preprints a form of peer review? Preliminary analysis of bioRxiv comments. Mario Malički, Lauren A. Maggio and Juan Pablo Alperin. Improving gender equity and diversity at Lancet journals. Joan Marsh, Jocalyn Clark, Ashley Cooper and Ludmila M. Sheytanova.
16:00 – 16:15 (CET)	Break
16:15 – 17:15 (CET)	Lightning session 1 Chair: Ana Marušić, University of Split Software scaffolds for quality feedback in peer review. Oscar Diaz, Jeremías P. Contell and Haritz Medina. The challenges of finding peer reviewers: insights from our product design research. Antonio Tenorio Fornés and Elena Pérez Tirador. Peer Review in Legal journals. Jadranka Stojanovski, Ginevra Peruginelli and Elias Sanz-Casado. In Review on Research Square: a journal-integrated preprint system for Springer Nature. Michele Avissar-Whiting, Sowmya Swaminathan, Juliet Kaplan and Rachel Burley. Introducing a Data Accessibility Policy for journals at IOP Publishing: Measuring the impact on authors and editorial teams. Jade Holt and Andrew Walker.
17:15 – 18:15 (CET)	Lightning session 2 Chair: Jadranka Stojanovski, University of Zadar A Content Exploration of Reviewers’ Comments in FP7 Marie Curie ITN evaluation reports. Darko Hren, David Pina, Cristopher Norman and Ana Marusic. Platform for Responsible Editorial Policies. Wytske Hepkema, Serge Horbach and Willem Halffman. Decision-making approaches to grant funding allocation: insights from a realist synthesis. Alejandra Recio-Saucedo, Ksenia Kurbatskaya, Kathryn Fackrell, Katie Meadmore, Abby Bull, Simon Fraser and Amanda Blatch-Jones. Identification and comparison of key criteria of funding decision feedback to applicants: A funder and applicant perspective. Kathryn Fackrell, Katie Meadmore, Alejandra Recio Saucedo, Abby Bull, Ksenia Kurbatskaya, Simon Fraser and Amanda Blatch-Jones. Statistics in Peer Reviewed Journals. Anabel Forte, Daniel García-Costa, Emilia López-Iñesta, Flaminio Squazzoni, Phil Hurst, Francisco Grimaldo.

Thursday, 1 October 2020

Venue: Conference site on Underline (create your account for free)

14:00 – 15:00 (CET)	Panel Session 2: Peer review in the post-COVID era Organizer: ​Francisco Grimaldo, University of Valencia Panelists: Bahar Mehmani (Elsevier), Michael Willis (Wiley), Duncan Nicholas (EASE), Flaminio Squazzoni (University of Milan)
15:00 – 16:00 (CET)	Q&A Session 4: Peer review of grant proposals Chair: Marco Seeber, University of Agder Peer Reviews’ Prediction in Proposals’ Funding Success: A Sentiment Analysis of Grant Reviews. Junwen Luo, Olalere Alabi, Thomas Feliciani, Pablo Lucas and Kalpana Shankar. How to improve the quality of grant proposal review? The exercise of responsible peer review in Taiwan. Carey Ming-Li Chen, Wen-Chi Hung and Kai-Lin Chi. Reviewers’ agreement and scores in Marie Curie proposals from 2007 to 2018. David Pina, Darko Hren, Ivan Buljan, and Ana Marušić. Meta Research: Ethics assessment of H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie individual fellowships. Ivan Buljan, David Pina and Ana Marušić. Reviewers’ traits affecting disagreement in proposal evaluation. Insights from Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions and COST actions. Marco Seeber, Jef Vlegels, David Pina, Elwin Reimink and Ana Marušić. Feedback to improve inter-rater reliability in grant peer review: A randomized controlled trial. Jan-Ole Hesselberg and Ida Svege.
16:00 – 16:15 (CET)	Break
16:15 – 17:15 (CET)	Q&A Session 5: Computational studies of peer review Chair: Simone Righi (University College London) Introduction to the session.Karoly Takacs (Linköping University) Challenges in Using Bibliometric Indicators to Assess Peer Review Decisions: A Simulation Model. Kwun Hang Lai, Ludo Waltman and Vincent Traag. Hacking one’s way to peer-review. Gayanga B. Herath, Davide Secchi and Stephen J. Cowley. Does social influence matter in peer review? Thomas Feliciani, Kalpana Shankar, Pablo Lucas and Junwen Luo. Honest Signaling in Academic Publishing. Leonid Tiokhin, Karthik Panchanathan, Daniel Lakens, Simine Vazire, Thomas Morgan and Kevin Zollman. Journal Competition and the Sustainability of Peer Review: An Agent-Based Model. Carmen Ibanescu, Simone Righi, Karoly Takacs and Elena Vallino. Local versus global inter-rater reliability for evaluating the internal validity of grant peer review: Considerations of measurement. Elena A. Erosheva, Patrícia Martinková and Carole J. Lee.
17:15 – 18:00 (CET)	Panel Session 3: Policy lessons from social simulation & the future of peer review modelling Organizer: Thomas Feliciani, University College Dublin Panelists: Bruce Edmonds (University of Manchester), Kalpana Shankar (University College Dublin), Flaminio Squazzoni (University of Milan)