MeatballWiki | RecentChanges | Random Page | Indices | Categories

Academic journals must solve the problem of publishing articles on subjects only very few people know about. The question is: How to guarantee quality standards? The solution is PeerReview. Authors are asked to review other submission to the journal in return. Thus knowledgeable people get to assure quality.

Even though this is often better than publishing articles yourself on the web, due to ReputationEconomics, this model is not superior to normal journalism. Both have a reputation to defend, so obvious abuse will not be tolerated. Both allow subtle abuse, however: In PeerReviewedJournals, reviewers and would-be-authors are part of the same community, thus chances are that reviewers might be competitors or better friends with competitors. Thus publication of some articles can be delayed or prevented. In normal journals, this can happen as well, but there at least, the responsibility is not shared with an anonymous group of reviewers. PeerReviewedJournals make it harder to EnforceResponsibility.


MeatballWiki | RecentChanges | Random Page | Indices | Categories
Edit text of this page | View other revisions | Search MetaWiki