Comments on: Peer review http://camba.ucsd.edu/blog/phonoloblog/2007/08/09/peer-review/ all things phonology | camba.ucsd.edu/phonoloblog Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:26:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: John McCarthy http://camba.ucsd.edu/blog/phonoloblog/2007/08/09/peer-review/#comment-3188 John McCarthy Fri, 24 Aug 2007 23:42:13 +0000 http://camba.ucsd.edu/phonoloblog/index.php/2007/08/09/peer-review/#comment-3188 <p>Eric's remarks about ROA remind me of a phenomenon that has long puzzled me. Some researchers, of status high or low, don't post their work on ROA, or have done so only very sporadically. In many cases, the work isn't available on the researcher's personal webpage either. Since putting the work on ROA, or at least where Google can find it, greatly increases the likelihood that it will be read and cited, one would think that it is in the researcher's best interest to make the work as easy to find and read as possible. Are people sitting on their stuff because they intend to publish it? Book publishers definitely have a problem with book manuscripts on the web, but I don't know of any journals that have a problem with making the draft of an article available on the web, at least until it is published. I suppose that putting the manuscript on the web might make double-blind reviewing harder to achieve, but true double-blind reviewing is nearly unachievable in a field as small as ours anyway.</p> Eric’s remarks about ROA remind me of a phenomenon that has long puzzled me. Some researchers, of status high or low, don’t post their work on ROA, or have done so only very sporadically. In many cases, the work isn’t available on the researcher’s personal webpage either. Since putting the work on ROA, or at least where Google can find it, greatly increases the likelihood that it will be read and cited, one would think that it is in the researcher’s best interest to make the work as easy to find and read as possible. Are people sitting on their stuff because they intend to publish it? Book publishers definitely have a problem with book manuscripts on the web, but I don’t know of any journals that have a problem with making the draft of an article available on the web, at least until it is published. I suppose that putting the manuscript on the web might make double-blind reviewing harder to achieve, but true double-blind reviewing is nearly unachievable in a field as small as ours anyway.

]]> By: Ed http://camba.ucsd.edu/blog/phonoloblog/2007/08/09/peer-review/#comment-3187 Ed Tue, 21 Aug 2007 17:36:32 +0000 http://camba.ucsd.edu/phonoloblog/index.php/2007/08/09/peer-review/#comment-3187 <p>Eric,</p> <p>Have you looked at PLoS? They have a new service <a href="http://www.scivee.com/" rel="nofollow">SciVee</a>.</p> <blockquote>SciVee allows scientists to communicate their work as a multimedia presentation incorporated with the content of their published article. Other scientists can freely view uploaded presentations and engage in virtual discussions with the author and other viewers. SciVee also facilitates the creation of communities around specific articles and keywords. Use this medium to meet peers and future collaborators that share your particular research interests.</blockquote> Eric,

Have you looked at PLoS? They have a new service
SciVee.

SciVee allows scientists to communicate their work as a multimedia presentation incorporated with the content of their published article. Other scientists can freely view uploaded presentations and engage in virtual discussions with the author and other viewers. SciVee also facilitates the creation of communities around specific articles and keywords. Use this medium to meet peers and future collaborators that share your particular research interests.

]]> By: Ed http://camba.ucsd.edu/blog/phonoloblog/2007/08/09/peer-review/#comment-3186 Ed Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:36:16 +0000 http://camba.ucsd.edu/phonoloblog/index.php/2007/08/09/peer-review/#comment-3186 <p>Eric,</p> <p>Are we floundering?</p> Eric,

Are we floundering?

]]>