Publish or Perish 2.0

An interesting perspective on the scientific publishing process.  They note the congruence of the scientific method with the open nature of web 2.0 publishing, but miss commenting on the lack of page charges.

PharmaLive: BioInformatics, LLC Studies Effective Strategies for Scientific Publishing in a Web 2.0 World

A North American Lab Director had this to say: “The traditional peer review system is too slow, outdated, becoming obsolete… articles should be published right away on the net, linked by aggregator sites so other scientists can review and post comments online. This would open peer review to a much wider audience (hundreds can comment instead of 3-4) and should improve the quality of science.”

Published in: on December 1, 2008 at 10:38 pm  Comments (1)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

One CommentLeave a comment

  1. i’d like to know who this “north american lab director” is. i definitely agree with his statement.

    what we need is a general open post-publication peer review system with
    – any scientist allowed to review any paper
    – public availability of all reviews along with each published paper
    – reviews as open letters to the community
    – signed and unsigned reviews
    – digital author authentication
    – numerical judgments on multiple scales allowing for automatic paper selection by means of arbitrary ranking functions

    i’m exploring these ideas here:

    it would be great to hear your thoughts.

    –nikolaus kriegeskorte

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: