Peer-Reviewing Processes and Incentives: Data Management Community Survey Results

Reviewing papers for conferences is an important and hard task that brings several challenges. The Data Management community has been increasingly struggling with high reviewer load, low-quality reviews and low reviewer engagement, unethical reviewing practices as well as undeclared and under-declared conflicts of interest. In this article, we report the results of a survey we conducted to gather the opinion of the Data Management community regarding what could be done to address these challenges. We reached out to about 1,200 members of the data management community with relevant reviewing experience and collected 345 anonymous responses. We plan to follow up with a subsequent report, discussing in more depth particular proposals, inspired by the collective feedback from the community.