2

SciPoll 637: Crowd Sourcing of Publication Review

What level of compensation would you require to perform a quick critical review of a publication in your area of expertise within 1 week?

Share Page
Post on LinkedIn
Copy URL to Clipboard
Copied!

Results
(733 Answers)

Answer Explanations

  • $0
    user-907425
    Same answer/
  • $250-499
    user-924219
    These journals are profitable and they have gotten free services for decades from skilled and knowledgable physicians and scientists. That needs to change
  • $500-999
    user-847559
    See above 
  • $100 -249
    user-868575
    hourly rate, no premium
  • $100 -249
    user-689501
    Reading and making sense of science is the most time-consuming part. I anticipate it will take at least 2 hours. Getting paid $125/hour is appropriate.  
  • $250-499
    user-441980
    Because of time constraints 

    Because of many journal’s request 

    Because of APC of journal 
  • $250-499
    user-50503
    Usually takes me 4-6 hours to review a paper correctly at a rate of between 150-250 per hour 
  • $100 -249
    user-433063
    I think that $50/hour is a good payment considering the time.
  • user-461442
     I would happily give 1-2 hours without compensation assuming I had the time available. 
  • $100 -249
    user-377267
    More time means less competition with other activities.
  • $250-499
    user-542548
    Compensation based on my hourly fee without an added incentive for a 1-week timeline. 
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-983537
    Assuming the amount of work is the same as in question 1 the compensation would also be the same. 
  • $500-999
    user-57242
    One week is a well spread time....and can help to create ample time within the week for a review 
  • $250-499
    user-559827
    I consider that this amount of money could be appropriate for this period of time for the review.
  • $250-499
    user-786434
    It is a fair fee for an eventual task
  • $100 -249
    user-653585
    This is to compensate for my time as I would have left other money making opportunities to review the paper 
  • $100 -249
    user-355649
    Appropriate
  • $100 -249
    user-113444
    If the review is not required immediately, we are not forced to abandon other activities or work extra-hours. Thus the fee could be reduced.
  • $100 -249
    user-33117
    Realistically this depends on the size of the article. Assuming an article not more than 10 APS pages, I have quoted ca 3 hours' wage. 
  • $100 -249
    user-441179
    Assuming that a critical review requires me to read the publication in detail, it can not be that "quick". Assuming one takes about two hours to read and critically dissect the data and conclusions, a 75-100 dollars/hour seems reasonable to me given the lower level of urgency of the request. This is substantially variable when considering the amount of data in the publication. 
  • $500-999
    user-372960
     The level of demand is lower, I can do it on the weekend.
  • $250-499
    user-38414
    Assuming that it would take about 5 hours to properly evaluate the paper, I consider US$ 250,00 as a minimum value.
  • $100 -249
    user-51945
    More time
  • $250-499
    user-864332
    I would want there to be a high compensation for this level of work to dissuade publication companies from shifting to a model where this timeframe is common.
  • $100 -249
    user-287804
    I would stick with the same amount as above.
    For an academic it is not unusual to work off the regular work hours; so most likely the peer review will not be done during regular work hours but outside of this hours, such as evenings or weekends.
  • $100 -249
    user-138963
    less pressure
  • $250-499
    user-412773
    Same reasons as abobe, but less preause.
  • $100 -249
    user-348125
     The compensation range of $100-$249 is appropriate for a one-week critical review considering the time commitment and expertise required. This range reflects fair compensation for the effort and specialized knowledge needed to conduct a thorough evaluation within a reasonable timeframe, ensuring prompt and valuable feedback for the publication. 
  • $100 -249
    user-174346
    This is what I am paid now.
  • $100 -249
    user-652534
    1-2 hours of work is too little for a decent review (unless it is a paper of 3-5 pages max)
  • $250-499
    user-770938
     I believe this is a suitable level of compensation which publishing companies should be more than able to afford. 
  • $100 -249
    user-787895
    Towards the top end of this category.
  • $250-499
    user-475346
    My typical rate for pharmaceutical consulting is $400-500/hr, but I would probably consider a "discount" since it's peer review rather than consulting (and the medical journals don't have pockets as deep as the pharmaceutical companies).
  • $100 -249
    user-828172
    Typical annual consultant/expert's salary divided by number of hours worked over a year to earn the salary
  • $100 -249
    user-299419
    One week still being a short time to manage well the review.
  • $250-499
    user-210113
    compensation of time spent
  • $1-99
    user-275661
    Based on my regular monthly salary, one-two hours work would be at the top of this range. Finding the time should be achievable within a week. 
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-730942
    Depending on the number of pages, complexity of the work and detail of the results presented. I would have to deeply analyse it and compare it the data available in literature. Sometimes in a week is complicate to perform this type of task.
  • $1-99
    user-598503
    Reviewer is investing his important time by keep other work on side.
  • $250-499
    user-876767
    250 usd would be appropriate 
  • $250-499
    user-494980
    Writing a good review suggesting step by step what can be improved and checking each of the reference needs time to be prepared. Even writing takes 1-2 hours preparing review takes much more time depending ona topic and on the kind of the article (review, original, short communication etc.). Even you have a week time writing a review takes you the same amount of time. I believe it is better to do it at once from the beginning to the end so the amount of time for the review is important but still you need to be paid well for your professional work.
  • $100 -249
    user-819310
    As it might requre up to a full days load but with working another assignments in between the 7 daysand not as such stressful to deliver in some of the previous experiences I have had, getting a compensation of $100-249 is fair considering 8 working hours with a fair daily rate of consulatncy service payment for professionals and also underatnding this is a professional ethics to criticize and make contribution for the science.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-715354
    I think my explanation to above question answers all.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-958657
    same amount of work?
  • $100 -249
    user-914553
    A week is still a bit of commitment on your part, so same as before
  • $500-999
    user-386308
    One week already makes programming and studying easier, so work and stress are certainly diluted.
  • $100 -249
    user-938667
    Same as above
  • $100 -249
    user-126332
    This is enough to feel (i.e. it would be dinner for two), but not outrageous. 
  • $500-999
    user-446741
    A thorough review is 2-3 hours work. A reasonable hourly rate for my expertise is $250, even at 1-2 hours that is $500. Expect a little more for the increased urgency over the usual 2 week turnaround requirement for reviews.
  • $1-99
    user-416823
    This is close to the standard 2-3 weeks that I may not have to shift anything around, but still tight enough of a deadline.
  • $500-999
    user-549473
    The experts have to be compensated for their work as they are often sollicitated one week is short time
  • $100 -249
    user-242774
     I am on the Editorial Boards of four peer-reviewed toxicology journals and do many peer-reviews of papers for those journals in generally < 1 day.  I think that compensation in the range of $100.00 to $249.00 would be very reasonable for a 1-week timeframe for peer-review. 
  • $100 -249
    user-474509
    No urgency, but the time required can be still a whole day work
  • $100 -249
    user-86763
    99 usd for my work + 50 usd for disturbing my plans
  • $0
    user-780719
    Same answer as #1 because, for me, it is the total level of effort rather than the time frame that we have to work within.   1-2 hours writing effort due in 1 week is the same as 1-2 hours effort due in 1 day.
  • $100 -249
    user-330420
    Reviewing a manuscript comprehensively can take approximately 3 to 4 hours, requiring a high level of academic expertise.
  • $250-499
    user-480270
    The shorter the evaluation time, the more it puts pressure on the pairs and becomes a pressure job.
  • $250-499
    user-692996
    For long paler (30-70 pages)
  • $1-99
    user-109201
    Because when you review a manuscript, you have to hold your own pending tasks. Moreover, open access or paid journals charge from author but don't pay potencial reviewers. Payment to reviewers would enhance quality of reviewing.
  • $250-499
    user-642158
    I believe, given this relatively longer time, may facilitate better review. 
  • $500-999
    user-819356
    This represents the minimum fee for reviewing a research paper within one week. In the event of non-continuation, the value may increase according to the time required for review
  • $100 -249
    user-740731
    One week time is quite relaxing.
  • $250-499
    user-36877
    You will work more than two hours because you will be thinking on the paper more time
  • $100 -249
    user-169864
    The task is more easily adjusted to normal duties
  • $100 -249
    user-492635
    More time for the work means that you have ample time to understand and give the feedback.
  • $500-999
    user-988041
    See above answer. Because this is less urgent, the compensation may be lower.
  • $100 -249
    user-105956
    See above. This amount is less than that required for a one-day return.
  • $250-499
    user-774962
    The review time, assuming that you are referring to the same article, would be the same regardless of the time allotted. 
  • $500-999
    user-579540
    What is important for me is the total amount of time and energy I spend to complete a task. So, whether it is required within a day or a week or a month will not change that. However, having flexibility will increase my willingness to do the work. 
  • $250-499
    user-294320
    One week is relatively doable, but still requires some magics
  • $250-499
    user-732234
    One week could offer clinician a bit more time to re-organize their time tamble 
  • $100 -249
    user-697539
    The reason is same as above except that more time is now available for concentrating on the subject matter and my schedule can be adjusted for the review
  • $100 -249
    user-935064
    I could fit it in otherwise empty time slots in my schedule.
  • $250-499
    user-337025
    You are right, experts need at least a symbolic support for their time and effort, support which will bust their involvement as reviewers, especially in a short time frame.
    Of course the complexity of the paper/work can require variable (lower or higher) such expected support.
    Success and all the best!
  • $250-499
    user-86609
    I would require I would require at least $100 per hour for compensation (2 hours = $200), plus at least $100 for the one-week turnaround time. 
  • $500-999
    user-223303
    See above
  • $250-499
    user-429780
    I am willing to review a manuscript within one week. This revision is a scientific and comprehensive revision.
  • $1-99
    user-496176 
    I prefer this amount because it is enough for me to review the article within 1 week.

  • $100 -249
    user-126416
    Spending a week for reviewing and sharing critical comments is worthy of the selected reimbursement amount 
  • $250-499
    user-61732
    Same
  • $100 -249
    user-660265
    The major purpose is the same as above, however within the week you can easier find the time for proper and careful review of the manuscript, so $150 will be ok. 
  • $500-999
    user-684482
    Reviews will almost always take more than 1-2 hours of work.
  • $250-499
    user-802001
    I always give the full level of effort appropriate to the task. Having more time to do the work makes the job easier.
  • $500-999
    user-446692
    Based on average hour rates, plus a close deadline.
  • $500-999
    Sonne72
    Same. 
  • $250-499
    user-267969
    Same issues as above--this is not a 1-2 hr job, but having a week to conduct the review makes it easier to manage and allows some time for checking other aspects, so a more thorough job than a 24-h turn-around permits. A reduced cost is appropriate since it is not such a rush job.
  • $100 -249
    user-841110
    Same as for question 1.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-274801
    The level of compensation would depend on the size (number of words) of the article, as it includes the time to read and analyze the article and the time to write the review report (a preset grading criteria, and little required writing, i.e. 1 to 2 hours of work), thus approximately  8 to 12 working hours.
    Assume that the article is a little longer (up to 15 pages). 
  • $100 -249
    user-777357
    SAme answer as above.
  • $100 -249
    user-489806
    This is the time frame I normally perform reviews. I think it is just, given that my current employment only allows for an hour or two of review per weeknight.
  • $100 -249
    user-881641
    The amount range picked is fair enough for a review withina week
  • $500-999
    user-982423
    Estimation only
  • $100 -249
    user-570468
    Considering what was said above, this would be easier to incorporate into my weekly work. Nevertheless, one week's time is still limited, given my usual full schedule. 
  • $100 -249
    user-125484
    Peer review is a process that evaluates the validity, quality, and originality of articles, with the ultimate goal of maintaining the integrity of science by filtering out invalid or poor quality articles, all that need less effort.
  • $250-499
    user-208051
    1-2 hours of work: my rate is $250
  • $100 -249
    user-480744
    Assuming the review would take 1-2 hours and and the review could be done on a weekend, then it is only fair to ask for the same hourly rate as my own salary.
  • $250-499
    user-86448
    It doesn't matter what the time is affixed to the review. Per review it would be the same as indicated

  • $250-499
    user-242021
    Feels fair.
  • $0
    user-589243
    Medicine is already prostituted enough to charge fees for reviewing clinical work.  OK?
  • $250-499
    user-802518
    200 dollar per hour
    Total amount of 400 for 2 hours work seems reasonable
  • $250-499
    user-753791
    This amount is good enough given the appreciable time devoted to a sound peer-review.
  • $100 -249
    user-371021
    200 usd
  • $100 -249
    user-215705
    Academic journals rake in large sums of profit every year with open access fees typically in excess of $2,000 - $3,000 USD per article. Many popular journals publish hundreds or thousands of articles annually, such as MDPI which is a publisher that owns dozens of academic journals. The Scholarly Kitchen website reported that in 2020, MDPI made between $2 million and $12 million USD in profit from article processing charges alone, this likely includes the fact that they offer a small APC waiver to peer reviewers ranging from $50 to $200 USD (however, it is an APC waiver and not cash). Considering that reviewers are typically not paid, it seems a publisher such as this one could stand to offer $200-300 hundred dollars to each reviewer (assuming 2 per article) and still be profitable. I'm sure this number would vary across journals depending on staffing levels. MDPI has a very sizeable staff size, whereas some journals are almost completely volunteer (i.e. editor-in-chief, associate editors, reviewers are all volunteer and then a few hired staff handle website, publishing, etc.).  If I were to receive around $150 - $250 per review with about 2hours of work, I would be more inclined to accept peer review assignments, regardless of the length of time I have to complete it (i.e. 1 month, 1 week, 1 day). However, I would simply decline a 1-day window in many instances due to time, and a higher premium would likely entice more people to accept it.
  • $250-499
    user-49719
    A shorter deadline makes no difference in the amount of work. It would only means that I may not take the review if I have a previous commitment for that date. 
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-923404
    This would require setting aside some hours a day within the week, culminating to the suggested 1-2 hours. 
  • $100 -249
    user-567411
    Usually, this amount is sufficient to cover the process and encourage the reviewer.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-382369
    By doing a similar argumentation as above:
     The current average salary in my country (Argentina) as full professor/ principal investigator is 2000 USD per month, which gives an average of  231 USD per week. Therefore, if we consider similar compensations for work, a compensation of a revision that would take a week would be 231 USD. On the other hand, other countries (such as USA) pay an average of 7000 USD per month, which gives an avarage of 1615 USD per week. Therefore a fair compensation for a revision that would take one week would be 1615 USD per week for an american senior investigator.
    However, the work burden is similar for all investigators whichever their country is. For this, I consider that an average of 250 to 1700 USD would do. 
  • $100 -249
    user-576481
    Same as above 
  • $250-499
    user-637348
    Plenty of time  can given less stress to the brain for evaluation
  • $100 -249
    user-397052
    If requests for quick reviews were solicited like most journals do now (use their expertise database) and not use the same reviewer more than once in a defined period of time,  I think some type of compensation is reasonable.  However, I could see how this could be abused so guardrails must be put in place.  
  • $250-499
    user-510547
     This is a fair rate for the technical review in my field of expertise, considering my 30+ years of experience 
  • $100 -249
    user-137308
    MDPI gives a 100 CHF voucher for each review completed within a week.
  • $250-499
    user-827851
    Three hour of work during the weekend 
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-898830
    This gives me more time to review.
  • $500-999
    user-966722
    University of New South  Wales from Sydney, Australia already payed to me 700AUS$ for simmilar service (review doctorate- PhD thesis). 
  • $250-499
    user-813332
    The time cost is the same as if it is in one day but the need to stop other work would not be so great
  • $250-499
    user-78154
    time
  • $100 -249
    user-920951
    Same as above but this time towards the lower end, say $50 /hour
  • $0
    user-550886
    The same answer as above.
  • $250-499
    user-102269
    In Mexico, the per hour-fee as an expert in my field (Economics) for the industry is around USD 150.  Two hours of work is 300 USD plus a "this week" urgent fee of USD 50. In total, USD 350 seems reasonable.
  • $250-499
    user-414626
    Same as for the 1-day response.
  • $250-499
    user-363225
    This would require a detailed literature search to deliver the best suggestions as far as the topic of discuss is concerned.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-969485
    A week (vs 1 day) is more manageable but still very quick. If a 1-day turnaround cost $2000, a week might be $1000. 
  • $100 -249
    user-673903
    I am retired but still working so I think compensation is a bonus.
  • $100 -249
    user-905834
    One week flexible time. Still, it is difficult to manage this with other responsibilities, but it can be managed in two or three sessions. So, I proceed with a lesser amount. However, the quality of this review will definitely be better than that of a one-day review.
  • $100 -249
    user-608413
    In one week it's possible to make a review within this period without impact in personal agenda
  • $500-999
    user-642125
    Given a week to do a high-quality review, I may not need to reschedule other events, and I would be willing to accept a lower compensation. 
  • $250-499
    user-520983
    I might be willing to go down to $200 for this.
  • $100 -249
    user-754769
    A one-week grace period gives some leeway for peer review, but it still requires a significant commitment of effort.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-657550
    Compensation will depend on the paper's difficulty level.
  • $500-999
    user-153764
    same rationale as above
  • $1-99
    user-779771
    $50 for a couple of hours of reviewing is acceptable.
  • $250-499
    user-775305
    My normal rate for consulting.
  • $0
    user-532803
    I believe it is my duty to provide peer review and expected as part of my paid job as an academic. 
  • $1-99
    user-731405
    This is not as problematic as in one day, but also causes some discomfort in Rome management.
  • $250-499
    user-60141
    half of above
  • $100 -249
    user-821219
    The upper end of this pay range option. Assuming this is not the usual full review of original or systematic review articles that could take upto 4-5 hours of accumulated work, and reviews in writing around 500 word counts. 
  • $500-999
    user-669670
    For a quick critical review of a publication in my area of expertise within one week, I would consider compensation in the range of $500-$999 to be appropriate. Here's why:

    1. Time Commitment: While a one-week timeframe provides more flexibility compared to completing the review within a day, it still requires a significant time commitment to thoroughly assess the publication, evaluate its methodology, results, and conclusions, and provide constructive feedback. This could entail spending several hours over the course of the week to ensure a comprehensive review.

    2. Expertise and Quality:As an expert in the field, my expertise and knowledge contribute to the quality and depth of the review. Compensation at this level reflects the value of the time, effort, and expertise required to deliver a robust evaluation of the publication.

    3. Motivation and Incentive: Compensation serves as a motivator and incentive for reviewers to dedicate the necessary time and attention to the review process. Paid reviews are often perceived as more thorough and reliable due to the commitment they represent.

    4. Blind Review and Preset Criteria: The blinding of identity and use of preset grading criteria streamline the review process, focusing efforts on the critical assessment of the content rather than extensive writing or formatting tasks.

    Overall, a compensation range of $500-$999 aligns with the time, expertise, and quality expected for a comprehensive and thoughtful review within a one-week timeframe. It reflects the value of the reviewer's contributions and ensures a diligent and professional approach to the peer review process.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-593019
    Same as above, makes no difference for the hours spent.
  • $1-99
    user-661948
    It applies the same reasons as in the 1st question. 
  • $100 -249
    user-460248
    I probably would not go lower than $100, unless the topic interests me a lot or I like the journal.
  • $250-499
    user-132334
    Would find time 
  • $250-499
    user-349303
    A proper review would take 1-2/d from research or teaching
  • $100 -249
    user-693592
    The time flexibility would make it worth it take a pay cut.
  • $250-499
    sab2x
    Based on hourly consulting rate, assuming 2 hours.
  • $250-499
    user-901717
    A week can help in help better review using a predefined set of parameters as stated in point 1.
  • $100 -249
    user-861466
    about $200 seems reasonable
  • $100 -249
    user-222888
    Same as above 
  • $100 -249
    user-676638
    If 1 week is the time available, this may allow the reviewer to attend few other most urgent matters before the review. In this case, the reviewer will not be forced  too much for major rescheduling of his overall activities, and hence a compensation in the range $150-249 may be okay. 
  • $250-499
    user-404672
    See above
  • $250-499
    user-248213
    One week of time will allows splitting the work in shorter sessions programming other normal work activities. 
  • $100 -249
    user-546254
    Same as previous, less time pressure.
  • $100 -249
    user-956623
    When estimating the compensation for fulfilling an assignment on short notice, it is important to take into account not only the time that is required to fulfill the assignment but that there will be the need to cancel/postpone other important business or work outside normal working hours. 1 week's notice makes it very likely that this will be a necessity  
  • $100 -249
    user-138300
    Normal fee
  • $100 -249
    user-946844
    My university bills my time as $400 an hour
  • $100 -249
    user-255626
    Hi,
    Since I am new to Scipinion, I would charge 100$. But this can change later.
  • $1-99
    user-540634
    One week is a reasonable time for aid the journal with urgent reviews. I consider compensation between $10 and $99 adequate, larger quantities may lead to researches considering it an alternative salary, as one can be reviewer for many journals  
  • $100 -249
    user-103348
    Time in research is of great importance, therefore, motivating to respond critically to reviewers, I believe would be an appropriate promoter to advance the rapid publication of knowledge, but, This would already be with a lower priority level. A reality is that researchers who also have health care work have limited time.
  • $100 -249
    user-266855
    The same amount of work is still required. But there is time to fit it in with my current work. 
  • $100 -249
    user-987379
    All big journals encourage a 1 week turnaround for a peer review. $100 for a week turnaround on a manuscript peer-review within a week, seems like an appropriate compensation.
  • $250-499
    user-437100
    Allow me to do other things in the week and still review the publication 
  • $1-99
    user-477977
    Same as previously but considering the 1 week period I believe less than 100 $ can be enough.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-200863
    It depends and may vary from nothing to $1,999 for review depending on the nature and purpose of the review. For example, nothing to very little (<$500) if the review is for a paper that will immediately help the general public for a crisis and it is for a journal that doesn't charge for the publication. I may ask for what I charge for my consulting if the manuscript is for something that will generate revenue for a business and/or for a journal that charges for publications. 
  • $100 -249
    user-744452
    This would still require the same amount of time
  • $250-499
    user-836594
    It also has to be done in my spare time and for it I have to pay income tax, health contribution and likely go into another taxation bracket
  • $250-499
    user-70642
    Reviewing is a job that requires knowledge and time.
  • $100 -249
    user-474161
     In my opinion, between $100 and $150 should be adequate as I will be able to accommodate daily obligations
  • $100 -249
    user-673264
    Money isn't so important, not when reviewing manuscripts.
  • $100 -249
    user-151126
    150
  • $100 -249
    user-41956
    See answer to Q 1
  • $250-499
    user-156962
    The same as for question 1 above. I would need to set aside the same amount of time for the review.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-86421
    This range of remuneration ensures that the reviewer feels valued for their time and expertise, while promoting high quality reviews. It is essential to emphasise that remuneration must be fair not only to attract qualified reviewers but also to maintain the integrity and quality of the academic peer review process.
  • $250-499
    user-43697
    My hourly rate of 200 USD would apply without express surcharge
  • $250-499
    user-639182
    This is the value regarding our salary as researcher (In France) where the salary of a scientist is quite low compared to the European standard
  • $100 -249
    user-358518
    If journal is charging APC, then the reviewer should be offered 100 dollar. 
    If journal is publishing on subscription basis, experts do review free of cost. But, free review delay reviewing system. People usually accept and after a month don't complete review. This delay review process and extend review time. So offering 100 dollar can speed up the review on time. 
  • $100 -249
    user-434792
    I will in my best during this period.
  • $100 -249
    user-101632
    Thats woughly what i make in the time it takes me to review a paper
  • $500-999
    user-798488
     I rearenge and reschwdules my critical works and may use my free times. 
  • $250-499
    user-852959
    I see no difference between this and the prior question, as the time involved is the same. If I did not have time to do the assignment on the day requested (i.e., the prior question), I would simply decline the request.
  • $100 -249
    user-797934
    It does take and effort plus you need to use material and software that you lready paid for. It will take from your time to to do other tasks
  • $500-999
    user-508906
    Basic consideration: Manuscript with mid-level complexity and size (manuscript ~40 page 1.5 line distance including all manuscript  sections without supplements, approx. 7 figures with up to 6 independent subitems) . Sufficient reviewer expertise to get instantly into the topic. 

    Understanding the basic story (abstract, figures) 0.5h
    reading the entire manuscript 2h
    cross-search in the literature 1h
    evaluation, writing evaluation resport (approx. 2 pages, 1 line distance) 1h
    submission into an electronix system 0.5h
    In total for basic evaluation 5h, considering a rate of 100$/h; total basic costs 500$

    This a realistic time schedule for an qualified review that helps the authors to improve their manuscript. 
    For timed evaluation I would add an extra of 100$; total full costs 600$ 


  • $100 -249
    user-813921
    See also the comment above. I think that the reviewer's work should be incentivized and paid, but there should be no proportionality between the time/effort made in the review and the money received. Money is a recognition of the relevance of the work.
  • $250-499
    user-917733
    Same as above, but without urgency
  • $0
    user-600401
    Peer review is an integral part of scientific publishing. Anyone who has published as benefited from peer review and they should be willing to return the benefit to other authors.
  • $500-999
    user-564243
    that's how much an hour to 2 hours of expert work is evaluated for such a delay
  • $100 -249
    user-28974
    it usually takes 4-5 hours, but i need to arrange them like off-duty hours
  • $100 -249
    user-270335
    One week is the ideal time of assignment. The compensation should be according to the revision job, which include not just a quick read but the chance of checking references used, informed numbers and results and assumed ideas consistency.
  • $250-499
    user-168151
    One week is at least considerable period.
  • $100 -249
    user-563966
    The time available is longer. 
  • $100 -249
    pigiron
    Similar to question 1, the shorter the time frame the more I have to juggle my schedule whereas with 2-3 weeks I can work a review into my down time etc.
  • $1-99
    user-190861
    As above 
  • $250-499
    user-417588
    Same reason 
  • $100 -249
    user-345911
    The higher part of the interval 200-250$ (considering previous answer)
  • $500-999
    user-972252
    1-week duration for review is less tight than a day.However it still need appropriate planning and coordination to complete the task within the time frame 
  • $100 -249
    user-891259
    1-2 hours of my work cost around 150-200$, and this defined my choice. If I am not restricted in time and the article is interesting for me, I will revise for free, but not with the 1-day condition.
  • $1-99
    user-239098
    If I could do the review during spare time when travelling of if meetings get cancelled or finish early I would require this amount. Planning a dedicated 2 hour slot would mean planning it into my evening and weekends and would need more than $100
  • $1-99
    user-590282
    Takes almost 8 hours to critically review a manuscript. 
  • $250-499
    user-847752
    It will require the adjustment of my weekly activities.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-634909
    The answer is based on an estimated hourly rate for a mid to senior PhD-level scientist in industry or academic, and the necessity to get behind on other work in order to prioritize the manuscript review and complete quickly, i.e., other work responsibilities/assignments would be delayed or suffer in order to complete a quick review on short notice.   
    Another thing to consider is if the length of the paper and whether or not it is a review article or a manuscript describing original research. 
  • $100 -249
    user-908189
    As above
  • $100 -249
    user-304796
    Same thing
  • $250-499
    user-359518
    Due tothe duration that is one week, I think the amount is reasonable enough 
  • $250-499
    user-222153
    Same rational as outlined above. 
  • $100 -249
    user-801912
    Same as before
  • $100 -249
    user-136424
    This is based on my current hourly rate of $100/hour.
  • $1-99
    user-190737
    In this case of review within a week, I would not vote for a mandatory payment. However, the comments can be validated if they help improve the standard of the article and may be paid based on that. One week is more than enough to provide valid comments on a manuscript if the reviewers spend enough time on it. This time needs to be compensated with payment.
  • $1-99
    user-891148
    This should be the right time for all the submitted articles. Payment could affect the quality of the review, so a low compensation or no compensation should be applied.
  • $500-999
    user-469485
    Compeleting project in one week suggests that reviewer has some liberty and time to review and can complete other tasks as well. So, reviewer can complete reviewing in a few sittings and in a better way. reviewer will be really contributing some valuable insights about article improvement.
  • $100 -249
    user-997202
    It needs to give more time to finish a review process in one week.  
  • $500-999
    user-15825
    I might say that value because some editorials offer wavers between 500-1000$ after reviewing some manuscripts within a week.
  • $1-99
    user-917846
    In this case, spaces can be generated to carry out the review that would be of higher quality.
  • $100 -249
    user-839058
    I believe it is the right valorization of the experience acquired in a field made available to revise a manuscript outside working hours in a week, in which work commitments that already take up a lot of time
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-245397
    Most of the time is sent for a critical reading review and critically analyzing the manuscript data. Each manuscript is different and the use of Engish language is also important. The actual price is 150-200 euro per hr.
  • $0
    user-921990
    See my response above.
  • $100 -249
    user-801044
    Performing a peer review within a week would be either plannable or else the task could be rejected.
  • $1,000-1,999
    user-189310
    1-2 h of my work for $1000 with one week's notice is what I would bill privately.
  • $100 -249
    user-251614
    This would account for my time and also the tasks that would need to be rearranged, but with less urgency, I would have the time to do that without necessarily impacting my established workflow and priorities for that week
  • $250-499
    user-356107
    Manuscript review is a highly specialized task that requires extensive knowledge in specific areas. In some cases, the review requires several days or several time intervals. The idea of ​​the manuscript must be understood in order to make suggestions or proposals appropriate to the nature of the work.
  • $500-999
    user-834001
     This would be about 3 to 4 hours of work for a detailed and comprehensive work.  
  • $100 -249
    user-902950
     Something along the lines of $30-40 per hour of work is acceptable, though the fee may increase if the specialty subject is particularly niche or challenging 
Previous Result Next Result

Debate
(0 Comments)

Please log in to comment.