[OJS] Is the "Does OJS support open peer review?" part of the FAQ still accurate?

Dear all,

one of my colleagues came across the PKP FAQ section in the wiki. One of the questions is about open peer review and OJS. It is stated:

Does OJS support open peer review?

We’ve certainly considered this for OJS, but in the absence of a clearly successful model, we’ve stayed away from investing any time in developing something yet. Once an obviously effective method of open reviews is evident, we’ll definitely consider moving it into OJS.

For now, however, there are some steps you could take to experiment with this in OJS:

  1. Create a new section in the journal (e.g., Open Submissions).

  2. Enable Reader Comments.

  3. Immediately Accept new submissions to this section, and notify author that their work has been accepted for open peer review, explain the process, and inform them that although their article will appear in the journal (as is), reader comments may require that it be revised or rejected.

  4. Immediately create a PDF/HTML galley file and schedule to latest issue.

  5. Monitor comments.

  6. After a specified period of time, unschedule the article.

  7. If comments indicate the article should be published as is, add any additional layout formatting and re-publish in the appropriate issue.

  8. If comments indicate the article requires revisions and/or re-review, change the editorial decision and notify the author. Follow the standard OJS process from this point forward.

  9. If comments indicate the article should not be published, change the editorial decision and notify the author. Follow the standard OJS process from this point forward.

Although this process isn’t perfect, it could allow you to start experimenting with open reviews immediately.

Is this accurate? We spent some time to figure out where readers comments could be activated and we couldn’t find it in our OJS 2.4.8 or in the OJS 3.0.2 test installation.

Hi @MarHerUMR,

In OJS 3.x, try the Hypothes.is plugin (available in the Plugin Gallery). It’s a better tool for facilitating conversations than OJS 2.x’s built-in commenting tool was.

Alec Smecher
Public Knowledge Project Team

Hi @asmecher,

thanks for the quick answer. We will have a look into this.


Hey guys,

is there any update on this?
Does OJS still not support open peer review?
If no, are there plans to add this feature in near future?
Are there maybe alternatives to OJS?

Any help is greatly appreciated!


There is definitely a successful Open Review model, OJS should take a look at the EGU journals hosted at Copernicus (for example, Climate of the Past and Biogeosciences).