Peer Review Dephasing
73244.2540 at CompuServe.COM
Tue Jun 4 20:35:19 EST 1996
I have publish a couple dozen papers and books and I have
been subjected to most basic issues concerning to the routine of
getting a paper published. I have reviewed a few papers too. Here
is my little piece of mind if it can be of any use:
There are 3 different issues relating the problem:
A) The relative qualities of different media to diseminate
information. Even though a monitor image quality is poor it still
beats the photocopies we all use in the lab or office. Also, the
computer works in colour, which is not the case with most
journals or library photocopiers. In summary, I would rather have
a 1024 x 768 pixel colour picture available on my computer than a
B&W photocopy lying around the lab.
B) The process of peer reviewing sucks, mostly because it is
tainted with political convenience. Peers are not such, they are
the masters that determine whether you have a career or not. How
about this equation: PEER=REFEREE ?
C) The object of publishing is NOT anymore to diseminate
infomration, but is the currency we scientists use to determine
our worth. I find that disgusting.
Ricardo Moro, Vancouver.
More information about the Bioforum