pull down to refresh
20 sats \ 2 replies \ @south_korea_ln 13 Nov 2024 \ on: RobertMaxwell’s dark legacy of peer review: time to stop a system that tramples? science
I'll come back to this very interesting piece later when I have more time. In the meanwhile, i am a bit puzzled by her suggestion for an alternative in the conclusion:
(emphasis mine)
How does one chose who qualifies as a single trusted editor?
I don’t think one does qualify as a “single trusted editor”. The alternative may be something like PubMed for the other sciences. Where you can put out your findings, apparently without editing, and people can look at it themselves, using their own judgment. Then they can either try to duplicate the results or not, as they choose. This way we don’t have to wait for the old school to all die out before paradigm change.
reply
Other sciences have arXiv...
arXiv is a free distribution service and an open-access archive for nearly 2.4 million scholarly articles in the fields of physics, mathematics, computer science, quantitative biology, quantitative finance, statistics, electrical engineering and systems science, and economics. Materials on this site are not peer-reviewed by arXiv.
reply