“what has come to be called “peer review” is not peer review proper but rather a crippled form of it which is not only of limited value at best as a critical control principle but is also a subversion of the peer principle that underlies the practice of authentic peer review.”https://twitter.com/sir_deenicus/status/1039016595853664256 …
-
Show this thread
-
Not sure if this is off topic, but have a question: who counts as peer in our current, modern system? For instance, for my own research I have found it hard to find true peers who can assess the methods and concepts I use, simply because they are far from mainstream in my field.
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @o_guest
I’ve been thinking the same question. I don’t really know the answer!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
and I was just asked to review a paper sent (erroneously, imo) to a J. of governance, b/c it mentioned machine learning. Roboticist reviewing an econometrics paper for gov journal is either a high or low point in interdisciplinary science.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
That's weird — did they give you wider context? Like "we need you to give us a perspective on X and Y because we are covered on A and B and C"?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think they genuinely had no idea what to do with it. I gave the editor a plain-text summary of what the paper was attempting so they could at least judge its appropriateness, reviewed the bits within my domain, and recommended finding an econometrics expert for the rest.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @robo_niccarey @o_guest and
And the editor was right - I think if your methods mention machine learning it's a good thing to dig out someone in that field rather than assuming it's all fine. But it demonstrates how broad the peer review network now has to be cast to get comprehensive feedback.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
Agreed.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.