The OSSP peer-review process is a rigorous selection process whereby the OSSP researcher community review research project proposals submitted by their peers and assess the soundness of the science which underlies them   The traditional scientific peer-review process is a selection process that is divided into two stages: (1) research project proposals submitted to grant agencies are reviewed to determine whether the proposed project should receive funding from the agency; and (2) research/scholarly articles - papers detailing the results of a research project - are reviewed prior to publication by scholarly journals.   In developing the OSSP peer-review system, we examined the problems existing within this traditional process; and developed a modified process through which we seek to maintain a superior standard regarding the scientific quality of the research proposals published to receive funding from the OSSP community of investors.

Under the traditional peer-review system, grant agencies must review projects both for the soundness of the science which underlies them, and the potential value of what may be gained through investing in them.

Because decisions regarding whether or not a project is worth investing in are made by potential investors (as opposed to The OSSP), our peer-review system is structured to rigorously ensure the soundness of the science underlying a given research project, and does not make recommendations regarding whether or not a project is 'worthy' of investment.  To this end, when proposed research projects are submitted by OSSP researchers; they are immediately posted online for all researchers throughout the OSSP community to review and critique.

Reviews are submitted using an anonymous form that enables researchers to recommend whether or not the proposal should be published, offer comments/criticism regarding the content/structure of the proposal, and to indicate any biases or personal interest in the project being proposed by answering five questions.  Each proposal must receive a minimum of ten reviews submitted by researchers unaffiliated with the researcher(s) who submits the project proposal.

The peer-review feedback form presented to OSSP researchers

Researchers whose proposals are not recommended for publication are encouraged to modify these proposals based on the feedback they receive, and re-submit them.  Resubmitted proposals are required to undergo a second peer-review cycle and must receive ten new reviews submitted by researchers unaffiliated with the researcher(s) who submits the project proposal.

There is no editorial review conducted on the final papers published by OSSP researchers upon the completion of their work.  Instead, researchers are encouraged to submit formally prepared manuscripts to scholarly journals for publication while the 'informal' final papers submitted to the OSSP are published for the benefit of the broader OSSP community.