Peer Review Anonymity
Graham_Clark at d4.niaid.pc.niaid.nih.gov
Wed Nov 1 14:27:34 EST 1995
<berezin at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Alexander Berezin)> wrote:
-You may say, how about all the crackpot crap, etc ?
-This problem has to be dealt with at the editorial
-level, prior to the revieweing.
You indicate that you would accept editors eliminating "all the crackpot
crap, etc". What is that if it is not peer review? Then we are only
talking about the form it will take, are we not? Personally, I would
rather have a peer, who actually works in my field, than an editor
evaluating my work.
-The above (30 reviews per year) shows an enormous
-waist of the your time taking the fact that the
-eventual efficiency of the whole process is almost
-nil (by the reasons I explained). Undoubtedly, you
-would prefer to spend it on your own research.
Actually, I view it as a privilege to be asked to serve the scientific
community in this way. Pity you don't feel the same.
C. Graham Clark, Ph.D.
Laboratory of Parasitic Diseases,
National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, MD 20892
e-mail: gclark at nih.gov
More information about the Bioforum