source: Nature, “Peer Review Debate”
Peer review is commonly accepted as an essential part of scientific publication. But the ways peer review is put into practice vary across journals and disciplines. What is the best method of peer review? Is it truly a value-adding process? What are the ethical concerns? And how can new technology be used to improve traditional models?
This Nature web debate consists of 22 articles of analyses and perspectives from leading scientists, publishers and other stakeholders to address these questions. Key links and relevant articles from our archive are listed here. Also see the Nature Peer Review blog.
The peer review system is dysfunctional in the context of the digital age, to slow, to repressive, no credits for the reviewer. The reviewer comments are unpublished….. My guess this system will be substituted by post publication review in the context of social networks. Scientific papers will loos their staid concept and evolve into a dynamic discourse.