Peer-reviewed journals: only for l33t researchers?

From a discussion of the traditional peer-review process in scientific journals.  The Public Library of Science is launching an open access journal called PLoS ONE with a new kind of peer-review model.  (Nature's doing someting similar.)  Instead of painstaking pre-publication review by qualified colleagues and researchers in the field (i.e., peers), they're trying this:

Articles published in the new journal will undergo peer review, but some of the standard criteria that older journals use to screen out articles--like "degree of advance" or "interest to a general reader"--won't be used by PLoS ONE reviewers; all papers of scientific merit will be posted to the public record...A more public review process will continue after publication, as readers will be able to rate, annotate, and comment on papers, and authors can respond to their comments. The original paper will remain as such, but comments, revisions, and updates will orbit nearby, an electronic Talmud on every article of significance.

It's an interesting Web 2.0 approach: just get it online, and let the masses sort it out.  Of course, it's not without its drawbacks:

It is easy to believe, in reading the plans for this new publication, that it truly represents "the first step" in a wonderful "revolution" (as the Public Library of Science puts it). But it is worth remembering that gates and gatekeepers serve the important function of keeping out barbarians; it would be regrettable if the world of science journals came to suffer the sort of "trolling" and "flaming" so common today in comments on blogs and Internet discussion boards. It would be unfortunate if the deliberate, measured character of scientific research and discourse were lost to a culture of speed, hype, and quick-hit comments.

Flaming is certainly a concern: ever been to a conference where petty arguments *didn't* break out and go on way too long at some point?  And you don't have to spend much time on internet message boards and community sites to get a feel for what happens when you give the wrong people (a) a forum to express their opinions, no matter how banal, and (b) anonymity.  Imagine a world where dissertations are published online by freshly doctorated researchers, only to be met with comments like "OMG n00b!!!!1!!"

Posted at 10:57AM Sep 28, 2006 by WILSON, JOSHUA in General  |  Comments[1]