Toward a New Model of Scientific Publishing: Discussion and a Proposal | Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience

Connotea Imports 2012-07-31

Summary:

"The current system of publishing in the biological sciences is notable for its redundancy, inconsistency, sluggishness, and opacity. These problems persist, and grow worse, because the peer review system remains focused on deciding whether or not to publish a paper in a particular journal rather than providing (1) a high-quality evaluation of scientific merit and (2) the information necessary to organize and prioritize the literature. Online access has eliminated the need for journals as distribution channels, so their primary current role is to provide authors with feedback prior to publication and a quick way for other researchers to prioritize the literature based on which journal publishes a paper....we propose an update to the system of publishing in which publication is guaranteed, but pre-publication peer review still occurs, giving the authors the opportunity to revise their work following a mini pre-reception from the field. This step also provides a consistent set of rankings and reviews to the marketplace, allowing for early prioritization and stabilizing its early dynamics. We further propose to improve the general quality of reviewing by providing tangible rewards to those who do it well...."

Link:

http://www.frontiersin.org/computational_neuroscience/10.3389/fncom.2011.00055/full

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) ยป Connotea Imports

Tags:

ru.no oa.new oa.peer_review

Authors:

petersuber

Date tagged:

07/31/2012, 12:05

Date published:

12/17/2011, 21:50