Reer Review: More Points

Simon M. Brocklehurst smb at bioch.ox.ac.uk
Fri Jan 26 08:17:44 EST 1996


Alexander Berezin wrote:
> 
stuff deleted...

> IF the prime function of peer review was INDEED to HELP
> the authors to achieve better lucidity of presentations
> than no one of us would object it. Even anonymity may
> not be an issue if, I repeat, IF, the prime function of
> peer review was to ASSIST the author(s) to improve the
> paper

  Whether or not this is one of the main aims of APR, it is
undeniably the case that papers are very often much improved
for having gone through the process.
  I wonder, would you change your views on this subject if 
the overwhelming majority of people who publish papers in 
high-quality journals came out on the side for APR?
_____________________________________________________________________________
|
|  ,_ o     Simon M. Brocklehurst,
| /  //\,   Oxford Centre for Molecular Sciences, Department of Biochemistry,
|   \>> |   University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
|    \\,    E-mail: smb at bioch.ox.ac.uk | WWW: http://www.ocms.ox.ac.uk/~smb/ 
|____________________________________________________________________________



More information about the Bioforum mailing list