QUO VADIS PEER REVIEW? THE SCHOLARLY LIFECYCLE FRAMEWORK, CURRENT REVIEW PROCESSES FOR SCHOLARLY AND SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE AND PUBLICATIONS, OPEN ACCESS, AND ALTERNATIVE PEER REVIEW METHODOLOGIES

The continuous and increasing development and usage of the worldwide internet has changed scholarly research, communication, and publication. Today it is usual to share research materials, information, and results via the internet and to communicate with peers and researchers all over the world within seconds. In addition Open Access has enabled and simplified processes of getting access to scholarly research and literature. Several platforms give researchers the opportunity to publish their work, to communicate with other researchers of their field and to be part of a research process. This article introduces the Scholarly Lifecycle Framework covering all processes within the scholarly and scientific research. Its main focus is on the analysis of the specific process of peer reviewing: It describes the main relevant concepts using the methodology of business process modelling. Based on the comparison of 19 selected review models representing the variety of used methodologies, the current status and overview of already existing reviewing processes and lifecycles for scholarly and scientific literature and publications is presented. Furthermore the article reflects alternative review processes proposed by scientific literature and discusses the impact of Open Access and Open Research in brief. From all these analyses and findings, alternative peer review methodologies and possible alternatives are deduced and developed. It can be summarized that Scholarly Lifecycle Framework is applicable and valuable for the distinction and coverage of all processes within the scholarly and scientific research. The usage of the methodology of business process modelling and of a standardized business process modelling notation leads to a precise analysis of the current status of the review processes for scholarly and scientific literature and publications combined with the takeup of alternatives from the scientific literature. The presented alternative peer review methodologies are broadening the variety of review processes leading to better open access and research and facilitating more discussions and exchange among researchers and communities for improved scholarly and scientific literature and publications.