Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia.
Department d'Informàtica, University of Valencia, Burjassot-València, Spain.
Elife. 2020 Jul 17;9:e53249. doi: 10.7554/eLife.53249.
Peer review is often criticized for being flawed, subjective and biased, but research into peer review has been hindered by a lack of access to peer review reports. Here we report the results of a study in which text-analysis software was used to determine the linguistic characteristics of 472,449 peer review reports. A range of characteristics (including analytical tone, authenticity, clout, three measures of sentiment, and morality) were studied as a function of reviewer recommendation, area of research, type of peer review and reviewer gender. We found that reviewer recommendation had the biggest impact on the linguistic characteristics of reports, and that area of research, type of peer review and reviewer gender had little or no impact. The lack of influence of research area, type of review or reviewer gender on the linguistic characteristics is a sign of the robustness of peer review.
同行评议常常因其缺陷、主观性和偏见而受到批评，但由于缺乏对同行评议报告的访问，同行评议的研究受到了阻碍。在这里，我们报告了一项研究的结果，该研究使用文本分析软件来确定 472449 份同行评议报告的语言特征。研究了一系列特征（包括分析语气、真实性、影响力、三种情感衡量标准和道德），作为评审员推荐、研究领域、同行评审类型和评审员性别的函数。我们发现，评审员的推荐对报告的语言特征有最大的影响，而研究领域、同行评审类型和评审员性别几乎没有影响。研究领域、评审类型或评审员性别对语言特征的影响很小或没有，这表明同行评议是稳健的。
