jump to navigation

incentivizing peer review October 29, 2007

Posted by ocmpoma in : open access , trackback

Via A Blog Around the Clock, a post over at PLoS on improving peer review.

As I understand the peer review process, there are really only two incentives to reviewers to do a good job: first is the fact that it’s “part of the job” of being an academic, this is a rather soft incentive; second is the ability of a reviewer to keep bad ideas from being circulated, this is also not much of a real incentive, especially considering the work involved in doing a good review.

I like the idea of making the review process more open; preserving anonymity wouldn’t be too difficult and the process could be possibly be made more open to others who aren’t designated reviewers to comment, as well.

I agree wholeheartedly with Pedro Beltrao’s comment on creating a ‘reputation system’. I think that reviewers could have a rank similar to the citation rank, this would incentivize reviewers to do a good job and reward those scientists and academics who review as well as publish.

Tags for this article: ,

[?]

Comments»

no comments yet - be the first?