Re:Is Peer Review a Good Idea? (2020)
by autoexec on Tuesday September 13, 2022 @09:26PM
(#32832233)
> Worse still, many papers are basically unintelligible to anyone outside of an "inner circle".
Right now we have papers simply filled with nonsense (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12517-021-08021-2) and papers on midi-chlorians (https://www.livescience.com/59927-midi-chlorians-paper-accep...). Even without the needlessly over-complicated writing, some papers may really only be able to be meaningfully reviewed by a small number of experts, but that won't be a huge number. Really I'd be happy if we managed to catch the papers any child in grade school could spot as phony.
Maybe we shouldn't be asking if peer-review is a good idea based on it's performance so far until we give it a serious effort.
Right now we have papers simply filled with nonsense (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12517-021-08021-2) and papers on midi-chlorians (https://www.livescience.com/59927-midi-chlorians-paper-accep...). Even without the needlessly over-complicated writing, some papers may really only be able to be meaningfully reviewed by a small number of experts, but that won't be a huge number. Really I'd be happy if we managed to catch the papers any child in grade school could spot as phony.
Maybe we shouldn't be asking if peer-review is a good idea based on it's performance so far until we give it a serious effort.