10 ms·
In traditional journals, the outcome of reviews is a yes or no for the article to be published. My feeling is that this is stressful and unecessarily constraini
by chmike 12y ago
In traditional journals, the outcome of reviews is a yes or no for the article to be published. My feeling is that this is stressful and unecessarily constraining for an open journal on internet. Why not assigning points and let reader set their own point sum threshold when they subscribe ? The review mechanism could then be more automatic and wouldn't need an editor.
- dagw 12y agoMy wife has peer-reviewed a number of articles and she doesn't just provide a Yes or No. The final outcome is one of four choices. Publishable in current form, Publishable after minor revisions, Not publishable in current form or not suitable for journal. In addition to this she is expected to provide at least half a page of critique and feedback that is (anonymously) passed on to the authors as justification for her decision. For example the last paper she just reviewed was the third revision of paper she rejected the first time around. The authors had obviously taken her (and others) comments on board and produced a better paper because of it. Had instead the paper been published online in its original form, but with a very low score, neither the authors or the readers would have benefited.