No Peer Review: LESS Garbage

William Tivol tivol at news.wadsworth.org
Fri Jan 19 17:19:56 EST 1996


Alexander Berezin (berezin at MCMAIL.CIS.MCMASTER.CA) wrote:

: On the contrary, it is very much conceivable. In peer review
: environment publication of paper (esp. in 'highly prestigeous'
: journal) brings you Currency Unit of Recognition (CUR).
: In non-PR environment (or in non-PR section of PR journal)
: publication of paper as such brings no CUR (status of self-
: circulated manuscript).
:   
: (HARRIMAN):
: > Without some type of mechanism for ascertaining the quality of
: > a submitted paper, the inevitable result will be more crap getting
: > published.

Dear Alex,
	The root of the problem is, indeed, the CUR, and for PR papers, the
assumption that they must all be of high quality leads to the situation 
where meerly counting papers is substituted for evaluating the quality of
the whole body of someone's work--thus, publish or perish.  If the quality
of publications were the foundation for career advancement and funding, the
motivation would be to publish fewer papers, each of which would be more
complete--APR or no APR.
	I have to agree that some quality control is necessary, but if the
system rewarded quality instead of quantity, the QC problem would be more
easily solved.
				Yours,
				Bill Tivol




More information about the Bioforum mailing list