Let's file this under 'ideas that would make scientific publishing worse' www.nature.com/articles/d41... - ThreadSky

About ThreadSky

ariskatzourakis.bsky.social • 68 days ago

Let's file this under 'ideas that would make scientific publishing worse'

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-04021-w

Comments

trishgreenhalgh.bsky.social•68 days ago

We just got reviewer scores back for a big paper. Our scores for “novelty” were 5/6, 4/6 and 1/6.

mpoessel.de•68 days ago

In the peer reviews I have received so far, the novelzy/importance question was always the one where subjective takes, and sometimes prejudices, were most prominent. (And often the variation was considerable, as in your case.)

trishgreenhalgh.bsky.social•68 days ago

Also, another quality criterion was “closeness to submitted protocol”. 🙄

mpoessel.de•68 days ago

That is less of a problem in my area of educational aspects of theoreticaö physics, so I can‘t speak to that :-)

trishgreenhalgh.bsky.social•68 days ago

Oh God

genotripe.bsky.social•68 days ago

Agreed. I’m reminded of this article by @philipcball.bsky.social

kertviele.bsky.social•67 days ago

This debate is all the more interesting to me now that I am outside academia. Publishing is at least a twofold endeavor. First is that universities essentially subcontract their personnel reviews out to the external peer review process. The second is actually science.

Posting Rules

Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply