Expanded implementation of Fast & Fair paid peer review reduces time to first decision without reducing review quality in a biology journal
- 1Baylor College of Medicine
Abstract
Traditional peer review is often slowed by delays in identifying willing reviewers and waiting for completed review reports. In a 2024 pilot on the journal Biology Open, we showed that Fast & Fair peer review, which uses pre-contracted paid reviewers and a structured editorial timeline, could deliver rapid, high-quality peer. Here, we report the expanded implementation of Fast & Fair at Biology Open in 2025. From 1 April 2025 onward, all direct submissions to the journal were considered for Fast & Fair peer review unless appropriate pre-contracted reviewer expertise was unavailable. Reviewers were paid 220 GBP per manuscript only if they completed the review on time, and the review met editorial quality expectations. Among peer-reviewed manuscripts submitted in 2025, Fast & Fair reduced time to first decision with reviews from a mean of 37.7 working days under conventional peer review to 5.5 working days. Reviewer commitment also improved. Fast & Fair invitations were accepted more often than conventional invitations (67% versus 23%), had lower nonresponse (13% versus 39%), and had higher completion among accepted invitations (98% versus 87%). Faster review was not associated with reduced review quality. Handling editors scored each review for usefulness in editorial decision-making. Fast & Fair produced fewer low-scoring reports than conventional peer review. Editorial behavior was also unchanged, with similar first-decision profiles and final acceptance rates (59% versus 61%). While financial sustainability remains to be tested at scale, the Fast & Fair model addresses a major bottleneck in traditional peer review by replacing ad hoc reviewer recruitment with conditional compensation, predefined quality standards and a strict editorial timeline.
Related
- Chitosan reduces turbidity without negative effects on scleractinian coral
- Pine weevil (Hylobius abietis L.) bark feeding reduces root carbohydrates without broad metabolic changes in Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) seedlings
- Information, involvement, or partnership? Exploring intrapartum decision-making during the implementation of a team-based intervention to support woman-centred care
- Fleming Fund Implementation in Kenya: What Have We Learned About Strengthening One Health Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance for Decision-making?
- An expanded LPS translocon mediates surface lipoprotein export in the Bacteroidota
BibTeX
@misc{gorelick2026expanded,
title = {{Expanded implementation of Fast & Fair paid peer review reduces time to first decision without reducing review quality in a biology journal}},
author = {D. A. Gorelick and A. Clark},
howpublished = {bioRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = jun,
doi = {10.64898/2026.06.02.729548},
url = {https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.02.729548v2},
note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Expanded implementation of Fast & Fair paid peer review reduces time to first decision without reducing review quality in a biology journal
AU - D. A. Gorelick
AU - A. Clark
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/06/02
PB - bioRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.06.02.729548
UR - https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.06.02.729548v2
AB - Traditional peer review is often slowed by delays in identifying willing reviewers and waiting for completed review reports. In a 2024 pilot on the journal Biology Open, we showed that Fast & Fair peer review, which uses pre-contracted paid reviewers and a structured editorial timeline, could deliver rapid, high-quality peer. Here, we report the expanded implementation of Fast & Fair at Biology Open in 2025. From 1 April 2025 onward, all direct submissions to the journal were considered for Fast & Fair peer review unless appropriate pre-contracted reviewer expertise was unavailable. Reviewers were paid 220 GBP per manuscript only if they completed the review on time, and the review met editorial quality expectations. Among peer-reviewed manuscripts submitted in 2025, Fast & Fair reduced time to first decision with reviews from a mean of 37.7 working days under conventional peer review to 5.5 working days. Reviewer commitment also improved. Fast & Fair invitations were accepted more often than conventional invitations (67% versus 23%), had lower nonresponse (13% versus 39%), and had higher completion among accepted invitations (98% versus 87%). Faster review was not associated with reduced review quality. Handling editors scored each review for usefulness in editorial decision-making. Fast & Fair produced fewer low-scoring reports than conventional peer review. Editorial behavior was also unchanged, with similar first-decision profiles and final acceptance rates (59% versus 61%). While financial sustainability remains to be tested at scale, the Fast & Fair model addresses a major bottleneck in traditional peer review by replacing ad hoc reviewer recruitment with conditional compensation, predefined quality standards and a strict editorial timeline.
ER -