1 / 25

Is Peer Review Peerless?

Is Peer Review Peerless?. Tony Eklof James Joyce Library University College Dublin LIR Annual Seminar 2009. Peer Review. What it is The peer review process Why peer review Criticisms Peer review in the sciences Peer review in the humanities Conclusions.

paula-mcknight
Télécharger la présentation

Is Peer Review Peerless?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Is Peer Review Peerless? Tony Eklof James Joyce Library University College Dublin LIR Annual Seminar 2009

  2. Peer Review • What it is • The peer review process • Why peer review • Criticisms • Peer review in the sciences • Peer review in the humanities • Conclusions

  3. The Frescoes of Domenico Ghirlandaio: A Study in High Renaissance and Early Mannerist Florence

  4. Journal peer review process

  5. Double Blind Review • Both authors & referees anonymous • Survey shows it is preferred • Support highest in humanities and amongst female authors (reduces bias) • Causes some problems with reviewers ie comparing with earlier works • At odds with the open sharing of information and transparency?

  6. Open Review • Some researchers now post pre-publication versions on web to invite feedback before formal submission • Increasingly reader’s comments and criticisms, particularly for open access journals, add a positive element to the process

  7. Why Peer Review? • Quality control for scholarly information • Weeds out fraud • Lessens workload of Editor • Promotes originality and academic rigour • Mechanism for improvement of manuscripts • Adds a ‘human judgement’ element to the academic process

  8. Social Text Duke University Press

  9. Criticisms • Slows up the research process • Time consuming for reviewers • For some manuscripts or proposals it may be difficult to find experts qualified to review • Bias of reviewer • Arbitrary, secret and subjective! • Researchers can be frustrated by process, valuable time spent on ‘lateral’ research

  10. Nature’s Peer Review Trial • Open Peer Review • 1 June-30 September 2006 • Authors of new papers submitted invited to have papers hosted on internet for public comment • Papers simultaneously subjected to standard peer review

  11. Nature’s Open Review • 71 out of 1,369 authors agreed to display papers for open comment (5%) • Healthy online traffic, but did not convert into significant amount of useful comment • Some authors reluctant for fear of ideas being ‘scooped’ • Nature to continue to explore open review but not to implement system

  12. Peer Review in Humanities • Applying bibliometric indicators in Arts can be problematical • Very broad range of subjects • Some esoteric and specialised • Interdisciplinary nature • Performing arts difficult to peer review

  13. Conclusion • Peer review is a flawed, much criticised system of insuring academic rigour in published journal articles • There is no better alternative system on offer • System improved by open and or double blind review, and by training for peer reviewers

More Related