Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
I wouldn't even call the "altruists" or "misanthropists" good for peer review either. If you have any amount of them in the process, you might as well let it be a "free for all anything goes" system, or, "damn them all to hell no one will publish anything because I said so" system. Where's the good in that??!!!!.
|
Quote:
Daniel Kennefick, a cosmologist at the University of Arkansas with a special interest in sociology, believes that the study exposes the vulnerability of peer review when referees are not accountable for their decisions. "The system provides an opportunity for referees to try to avoid embarrassment for themselves, which is not the goal at all," he says.
Kennefick feels that the current system also encourages scientists to publish findings that may not offer much of an advance.
"Many authors are nowadays determined to achieve publication for publication's sake, in an effort to secure an academic position and are not particularly swayed by the argument that it is in their own interests not to publish an incorrect article."
|
Ahh .. those damn cosmologists getting in on the act again !!
They all think alike !!
woof !!
Cheers