If you are using a version of DSpace that allows authorization policies for items, you could add the reviewer’s account to a Group that has access (or create a Group just for that reviewer) and grant Read access for the item to that group in the item’s Authorization policies. After the peer review was over, you’d probably want to remove that access.
I think that the solution to this may be easiest outside of DSpace. If the journal is managing the peer review of the manuscript, could they also manage the peer review of the dataset? Or, if the file was given to a neutral third party, the third party could give the dataset to the reviewer. -- Marianne Marianne Reed Digital Initiatives Coordinator 450 Watson Library University of Kansas Libraries [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 785-864-8913 From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lisa Johnston Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 4:28 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [dspace-community] Blind peer review in dspace Hi all, Question for the group: Has anyone had/resolved the use case of blind peer reviewer access to items that are embargoed under request a copy? We have recently encountered this issue with our data repository (http://z.umn.edu/DRUM) which is open access, but allows for up to 2 year embargo on files (using request a copy). In a few instances a researcher asked if we could allow for blind peer review to a dataset because it is associated with a manuscript submitted for a journal. This idea of "confidential peer-review" is also a requirement for depositing data associated with data papers in Nature Scientific Data. (See conditions for Institutional and project-specific repositories at http://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories) Under normal (non-embargoed) circumstances, there is no problem for anyone (reviewer or not) to anonymously access the files. But, in the case of an unaccepted manuscript, the researcher is holding off on releasing the data openly until the paper is accepted for publication. Therefore, when they upload the dataset with request a copy enabled, they run the potential of breaking the "blindness" when the reviewer requests access to the dataset (since all requests go to the submitter). Any suggestions for a way around this - technical or otherwise? Note that double blind is not the need here, just single blind that keeps the reviewer anonymous. Also note: For DRUM, only institutional affiliates are allowed to register to our repository as epeople. The reviewers will almost always come from outside the institution. Thanks for your collective wisdom! Lisa -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lisa Johnston Research Data Management/Curation Lead and Co-Director of the University Digital Conservancy University of Minnesota Libraries 108 Walter Library, Minneapolis, MN 55455 Hangouts: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> / Skype: ifylawwt http://lib.umn.edu/datamanagement | http://conservancy.umn.edu ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6908-9240 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DSpace Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/dspace-community. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DSpace Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/dspace-community. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
