Alternatives to peer review: novel approaches for research evaluation

被引:36
|
作者
Birukou, Aliaksandr [1 ,2 ]
Wakeling, Joseph Rushton [1 ]
Bartolini, Claudio [3 ]
Casati, Fabio [2 ]
Marchese, Maurizio [2 ]
Mirylenka, Katsiaryna [2 ]
Osman, Nardine [4 ]
Ragone, Azzurra [2 ,5 ]
Sierra, Carles [4 ]
Wassef, Aalam [6 ]
机构
[1] European Alliance Innovat, Ghent, Belgium
[2] Univ Trento, Dept Informat Engn & Comp Sci, Trento, Italy
[3] HP Labs, Serv Automat & Integrat Lab, Palo Alto, CA USA
[4] Artificial Intelligence Res Inst IIIA CSIC, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
[5] Exprivia SpA, Molfetta, Italy
[6] Peerevaluat Org, Paris, France
关键词
research evaluation; peer review; metrics; bidding; opinions; LiquidPub; UCount; MASKING AUTHOR IDENTITY; PREDICTIVE-VALIDITY; QUALITY; PUBLICATION; SELECTION; SCIENCE; MANUSCRIPTS; ACCEPTANCE; EVOLUTION; FAIRNESS;
D O I
10.3389/fncom.2011.00056
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
In this paper we review several novel approaches for research evaluation. We start with a brief overview of the peer review, its controversies, and metrics for assessing efficiency and overall quality of the peer review. We then discuss five approaches, including reputation-based ones, that come out of the research carried out by the LiquidPub project and research groups collaborated with LiquidPub. Those approaches are alternative or complementary to traditional peer review. We discuss pros and cons of the proposed approaches and conclude with a vision for the future of the research evaluation, arguing that no single system can suit all stakeholders in various communities.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Feedback practices in journal peer-review: a systematic literature review
    Chong, Sin Wang
    Lin, Tingjun
    ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2024, 49 (01) : 1 - 12
  • [22] Understanding the peer review endeavor in scientific publishing
    Zhang, Guangyao
    Xu, Shenmeng
    Sun, Yao
    Jiang, Chunlin
    Wang, Xianwen
    JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2022, 16 (02)
  • [23] The Air We Breathe: A Critical Look at Practices and Alternatives in the Peer-Review Process
    Suls, Jerry
    Martin, Rene
    PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2009, 4 (01) : 40 - 50
  • [24] On novel peer review system for academic journals: analysis based on social computing
    Liu, Li
    Wang, Qian
    Tan, Zong-Yuan
    Cai, Ning
    NONLINEAR DYNAMICS, 2023, 111 (12) : 11613 - 11627
  • [25] Types, limitations, and possible alternatives of peer review based on the literature and surgeons' opinions via Twitter: a narrative review
    Emile, Sameh Hany
    Hamid, Hytham K. S.
    Atici, Semra Demirli
    Kosker, Doga Nur
    Papa, Mario Virgilio
    Elfeki, Hossam
    Tan, Chee Yang
    El-Hussuna, Alaa
    Wexner, Steven D.
    SCIENCE EDITING, 2022, 9 (01): : 3 - 14
  • [26] Social Policy Excellence - Peer Review or Metrics? Analyzing the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise in Social Work and Social Policy and Administration
    McKay, Stephen
    SOCIAL POLICY & ADMINISTRATION, 2012, 46 (05) : 526 - 543
  • [27] Muller's nobel prize research and peer review
    Calabrese, Edward J.
    PHILOSOPHY ETHICS AND HUMANITIES IN MEDICINE, 2018, 13
  • [28] Negotiating Credibility: The Peer Review Process in Clinical Research
    Oddli, Hanne Weie
    Kjos, Peder
    Mcleod, John
    QUALITATIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2020, 7 (01) : 59 - 75
  • [29] Peer Review: a Constantly-Evolving Scientific Process
    Soares de Araujo, Claudio Gil
    ARQUIVOS BRASILEIROS DE CARDIOLOGIA, 2012, 98 (02) : E32 - E35
  • [30] Medico Scientific Literature Peer Review: How Relevant Is It?
    Misra, Basant Kumar
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2011, 76 (1-2) : 39 - 40