Academic Peer Review: Eliminating the Option of ‘Reject’ Without Author Response

2026/01/01 by Alya A. Arabi, Ahmed H. AlMarzouqi
Decision Sciences · #Academic Publishing and Open Access #Meta-analysis and systematic reviews #scientometrics and bibliometrics research

paper · pdf · doi:10.1002/leap.2038

openalex publication_date 2026/01/01 · openalex created_date 2026/01/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21

Abstract

Key Points In academic publishing, the peer review process can be marred by inefficiencies, biases, lack of transparency, and inaccuracies/inadequacies. The use of artificial intelligence tools in manuscript review adds a new dimension of uncertainty and accountability. Rejecting a manuscript after the first round of peer review without the authors' response has substantial consequences, and it undermines the fundamental legal rights of responding. The option of an appeal is not a feasible solution because it is often tied with excessive delays and barriers for the authors, and it is time‐consuming for the editors.

Citations

• The AI Review Lottery: Widespread AI-Assisted Peer Reviews Boost Paper Scores and Acceptance Rates
• Additional experiments required: A scoping review of recent evidence on key aspects of Open Peer Review
• A Critical Examination of the Ethics of AI-Mediated Peer Review
• Journal policies and editors’ opinions on peer review
• Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review

Related

• What Happens After Rejection? Making Invisible Peer Review Visible
• Death of a reviewer or death of peer review integrity? the challenges of using AI tools in peer reviewing and the need to go beyond publishing policies
• Stop Automating Peer Review Without Rigorous Evaluation
• Peer reviewer fatigue, or peer reviewer refusal?
• Hidden Actions and Hidden Information in Peer Review: A Dynamic Solution