Submit an Article Become a Reviewer

Editorial Policies

Peer Review Process

JOPD data papers are fully peer reviewed to ensure that they are accurate and that the datasets they describe meet the journal’s criteria. The datasets themselves are not reviewed in terms of validity or importance.

The aim of the JOPD peer review process is to ensure that each paper correctly describes the data, and that it has been openly archived in accordance with best practices. The datasets themselves are not reviewed in terms of validity or importance. Negative results for example can be useful to other researchers, and even data with inaccuracies (known or unknown) can help others to better contextualise research conclusions.

Importantly, the journal also practices a form of open peer review whereby reviewer comments for the author will be posted alongside the published article. Reviewers are encouraged, but not required, to sign their name alongside their reviews. Confidential comments to the editor will remain confidential.

All JOPD data papers are peer reviewed according to the following criteria:

paper peer review

 

1. The paper contents
  1. The methods section of the paper must provide sufficient detail that a reader can understand how the dataset was created, and would within reason be able to recreate it.
  2. The dataset must be correctly described.
  3. The reuse section must provide concrete and useful suggestions for reuse of the data.
data peer review2. The deposited data
  1. The repository the data is deposited in must be suitable for this subject and have a sustainability model (see our list of recommended repositories).
  2. The data must be deposited under an open license that permits unrestricted access (e.g. CC0, CC-BY).
  3. The deposited data must include a version that is in an open, non-proprietary format.
  4. The deposited data must have been labelled in such a way that a 3rd party can make sense of it (e.g. sensible column headers, descriptions in a readme text file).
  5. The deposited data must be actionable – i.e. if a specific script or software is needed to interpret it, this should also be archived and accessible.
  6. Studies involving human subjects should adhere to local ethical standards at the host institution and follow American Psychological Association's (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx). Participant data should be sufficiently anonymized and appropriate consent forms should be signed.

Section Policies

Data Papers

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Quick links