Peer Review Archives - Page 33 of 42

My Argument for Public Access to Research Reports

As the deadline for responses to the OSTP RFI approaches, perhaps we should reflect on how the government can make its own research reports available in a more complete, direct, and affordable manner.

Tweets, and Our Obsession with Alt Metrics

Can tweets predict future citations? A study of article tweets raises validity and ethical concerns.

The Best Dishes of 2011 — A Selection of Remarkable Posts from Another Great Year

When the data fail us, it’s up to the palate to discern the finest creations from the Kitchen. This year, there was a feast of offerings. This is one attempt at listing the most savory.

Chefs' Selections: The Best Books Read During 2011

From classics old to classics new, the Chefs’ discursive reading habits surfaced some gems in 2011.

Quality Reviewing Declines with Experience

A longitudinal study shows most reviewers submit poorer quality reviews over time. Cognitive decline and competing responsibilities may help to explain why experience may be a liability in peer-review.

Measuring the Wrong Things — Has the Scientific Method Been Compromised By Careerism?

As we continue to measure the number of papers, citations, and the combination, perhaps we should be measuring a much lower number — the number of studies that can be replicated after publication.

Can We Measure the Value of Professional Editors?

eLife asserts that professional editors create more harm than good. But how do we know that? How can we know that? Or is this just an emotional argument based on anecdote and conjecture rather than fact?

Is Peer Review a Coin Toss?

When authors think peer-review is about their chances of acceptance rather than the quality of their paper, it can lead to the wrong expectations and unproductive behaviors.

eLife: Can a Top-Tier Journal Run Without Professional Help?

Can a new open access journal that relies on working scientists to oversee its review process compete with other top-tier journals that employ professional editors?

Butt of the Joke — A Review Article Parody Proposes Smoking for Endurance Athletes

The vaunted review article gets a neat little send-up, and reminds us that part of the value of humor is that it keeps you loose and helps you retain a skeptical perspective.

The "Open" Prescription — Why It Doesn't Always Make Sense

The rhetoric of “open” seeks to rally science to some higher state, but it’s not clear what “open science” means, why it’s any better, and what the risks of its adoption might be.

The White House Calls for Information on Public Access to Publications and Data

The US government’s requests for information are of great importance for the future of academia and scholarly publishing. If you’re a traditionalist who sees open access as the downfall of civilization, an advocate who thinks information must be free, or someone who falls somewhere in between, this is your chance to create the future you’re seeking.

"A Novel Bookstore" — A Review

A review of the novel “A Novel Bookstore” by Laurence Cossé, which imagines an ideal bookstore and the policies required, including peer review, to make such a venture possible.

Are Open Access and Traditional Publishers in the Same Business?

We’ve lived long enough with the proposition that OA publishers compete with traditional publishers. Perhaps they do not. Some major indicators suggest a non-competitive coexistence.

Is PLoS ONE Slowing Down?

Claims of speed can be used to carve out a competitive edge, especially for journals serving authors. PLoS ONE entered the market claiming fast publication times, but data show that PLoS ONE is slowing down, with times more than doubling over the past few years. Is PLoS ONE losing its speed advantage?

The Scholarly Kitchen

Archives: Peer Review