Peer review is the means by which members of a field's dominant paradigm shut out the alternatives.
-
What's the alternative?
-
-
Someone, somewhere will still need to decide what reviews have merit and which don't.
-
Why? Why does there need to be some single authority that decides?
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
How exactly should open review be executed? Should anyone be able to judge any publication? Because that could and will backfire immensely. Or do you propose that any expert of a given field should be able to review any paper in his/her field? I would really like to know.
-
Like/dislike buttons on all papers. ;-)
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.