text
stringlengths 0
7.33k
|
|---|
Keywords: peer review noise quality control
|
Message-ID: <1990Nov13.172609.2302@daimi.aau.dk>
|
Date: 13 Nov 90 17:26:09 GMT
|
Sender: dsstodol@daimi.aau.dk (David S. Stodolsky)
|
Organization: DAIMI: Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark
|
Lines: 564
|
Consensus Journals:
|
Invitational journals based upon peer consensus
|
David S. Stodolsky
|
Roskilde University Centre
|
DK-4000 Roskilde
|
david@ruc.dk
|
Abstract
|
Computer networks open new possibilities for
|
scientific communication in terms of
|
quality, efficiency, and rapidity. Consensus
|
journals have the economy of invitational
|
journals and the objectivity of journals
|
based upon the peer review. That is, all
|
articles are published and the reader
|
benefits from article selection based upon
|
impartial refereeing. An additional benefit
|
of consensus journals is that the
|
negotiation process, that typically occurs
|
prior to publication, is automated, thus
|
saving efforts of participants.
|
Readers submit reviews that evaluate
|
articles on agreed dimensions. A statistical
|
procedure is used to identify the most
|
knowledgeable representative of each
|
consensus position and these persons are
|
invited to submit articles that justify the
|
review judgments they have submitted. A
|
major advantage of this approach is the
|
ability to develop reputation without
|
article publication.
|
The approach includes a protection mechanism
|
based upon pseudonyms, that substitutes for
|
the protection of anonymity typical with
|
scientific journals. This reduces the
|
potential for irresponsible behavior and
|
facilitates reputation development. The
|
level of quality enhancement is superior to
|
that achievable with anonymous peer review.
|
Eliminating the editor and the delay
|
associated with conventional refereeing
|
makes message quality enhancement available
|
in message systems for educational and
|
business environments.
|
____________________________________________________________________
|
This document has been prepared for electronic publication.
|
Underscore characters indicate the start and end of italicized
|
character sequences. Figures and tables assume a monospace font.
|
Citation: Stodolsky, D. S. (1990). Consensus Journals: Invitational
|
journals based upon peer consensus. _Datalogiske Skrifter_ (Writings
|
on Computer Science). No. 29 / 1990. Roskilde University Centre,
|
Institute of Geography, Socioeconomic Analysis, and Computer
|
Science. (ISSN 0109-9779-29)
|
____________________________________________________________________
|
Invitational journals can be distinguished from typical scholarly
|
journals by the sequence of events that results in publication of an
|
article. The sequence of events with a typical journal starts with
|
the writing of an article. The article is then transmitted to an
|
editor and refereed. After a successful review, often contingent
|
upon negotiated revisions, the article is published and read. With
|
invitational journals, however, events are reversed. The tentative
|
decision to publish an author is made first, often based upon the
|
reading of previous work by that author. Then negotiation between
|
the editor and author occurs, or there is informal refereeing of a
|
proposal, which if successful, results in the writing of an article.
|
The great advantage of this second sequence -- read, negotiate,
|
write -- is that almost every article written gets published. The
|
disadvantage is that selection of authors is somewhat arbitrary and
|
there is no way an unknown author can get published. The objective
|
of this article is to outline a method of scientific communication
|
that has the economy of invitational journals and the objectivity of
|
journals based upon the peer review. These self-edited journals will
|
be called _consensus journals_ in order to distinguish them from
|
conventional invitational journals.
|
Any reader of an article in a consensus journal can act as a
|
referee. Assume, for simplicity, that referees send reviews to a
|
mediator. At a deadline, the mediator performs calculations and
|
issues invitations to the referees who have been selected as new
|
authors (Figure 1). These calculations are implicit negotiations,
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.