With regards to:
"and, and, and, - how about adding the names of the reviewers **on**
the journal article as well (replace a dissenting reviewer by the
journal editor when a split decision is over-ruled).
This would likely insure *better* reviews as well as give credit"
I have advocated this for quite a while, so long as their names are
shown if accepted outright. What about the reviewers who haggle over
several drafts or ask for huge changes or extensive work - you know,
the ones you would kill if you knew who they were!
Certainly if the editor overrides the reviewers then that should be
stated on the paper. This occurred recently in Science as the reviewers
were outraged that it appeared that they had accepted the paper after
having discussed it extensively with fellow workers (it was a terrible
paper and much of the discussion was about the dubious sanity of the