Omni Brain links to a new feature at Nature: a 3 month trial period of "open" peer review. For those who opt to submit their papers under this track,
authors can choose to have their submissions posted on a preprint server for open comments, in parallel with the conventional peer review process. Anyone in the field may then post comments, provided they are prepared to identify themselves. Once the usual confidential peer review process is complete, the public 'open peer review' process will be closed. Nature will report on the results after the trial period is over.In other words, The Neurocritic must be identified by name to post open comments on the web, but may maintain anonymity if the editors send me a manuscript for review. In addition, the trial
will continue in parallel with Nature's usual procedures, and does not affect the likelihood of eventual publication of the submitted work.So what do the editors and authors do with the open peer review comments??
But you, too, can participate in Nature's peer review debate.
Comments will be reviewed by staff before being published. You can be as critical or controversial as you like, but please don't get personal or offensive, and do keep it brief. Excessively long entries may be cropped. Remember this is for feedback and discussion - not for publishing papers or press releases.
We strongly encourage you to use your real, full name. Email addresses are required: this is just in case we need to discuss your comment with you privately. They won’t be published.
UPDATE: well, they did allow this post to get in (perhaps to demonstrate the benefits of the current peer review system):
I am the biggest name in the world in electromagnetic theory. All my attempts to publish on electromagnetic theory have for thirty years been rejected worldwide by the system of peer review.
My comments are at
P.P.S. - Another Neurocritical opinion on the topic:
Anonymous Peer Review Means Never Having to Say You're Sorry
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]