pull down to refresh
the way editors of journals and magazines USED TO WORK. Fantastic
reply
Mmm, since I've been in academia (14 years or so) I don't think it's ever worked that way.
reply
I meant way back, before peer review. Like when the greats were running the journals, like 1910 or whatever
reply
That was before the kinds of work I'm thinking about even existed.
reply
I don't think so. When I say quick pass, I'm not saying it should be sloppy, just that the first author would do the immediately obvious stuff and write that up. The write up would still be high quality.
The subsequent authors would add the next levels of analysis that take up most of the time and usually only serve to increase confidence in the result.
reply
Yes, I like that idea.
reply
I’m imagining one person doing a quick first pass and publishing right away.
Then, instead of anonymous reviewers pointing out concerns, another researcher actually updates the work with those changes and publishes their results.
And so on.