One way to handle that would be to put an expiration date on PubCreds, perhaps 
24 months.

Heaven forbid it should all lead to a system of reviewers who would review the 
quality of reviews.  :-)

BILL

On Jul 22, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Amartya Saha wrote:

> Its a good idea; however there is a possibility of the quality of reviews 
> deteriorating, whereby reviewers may not assign the time and effort required 
> for an indepth review, as their main aim would  be to get as many "PubCreds" 
> as possible.
> cheers
> Amartya
> 
> 
> Quoting Jeremy Fox <[email protected]>:
> 
>> The peer review system is breaking down and will soon be in crisis:
>> increasing numbers of submitted manuscripts mean that demand for reviews is
>> outstripping supply. This is a classic "tragedy of the commons," in which
>> individuals have every incentive to exploit the "reviewer commons" by
>> submitting manuscripts, but little or no incentive to contribute reviews.
>> The result is a system increasingly dominated by "cheats" (individuals who
>> submit papers without doing proportionate reviewing), with increasingly
>> random and potentially biased results as more and more manuscripts are
>> rejected without external review.
>> 
>> In the latest issue of the ESA Bulletin (July 2010, v. 91, p. 325), Owen
>> Petchey and I propose a classic solution to this classic tragedy:
>> privatizing the commons. Specifically, we propose that instead of being free
>> to exploit the reviewer commons at will, authors should have to "pay" for
>> their submissions using a novel "currency" called PubCreds, earned by
>> performing reviews. We discuss how this simple, powerful idea could be
>> implemented in practice, and describe its advantages over previously
>> proposed solutions.
>> 
>> The article is available at
>> <http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/0012-9623-91.3.325>.
>> 
>> Owen and I are very serious about wanting to see this idea, or a suitable
>> alternative, implemented. We have set up a petition at
>> <http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/fix-peer-review/>. Please sign if you
>> support this idea, at least enough to want to see it further discussed. The
>> petition site also has a link to the article, and a blog where we'll be
>> updating on progress of the idea and responding to comments.
>> 
>> PubCreds are already set to be discussed by the ESA Publications Committee,
>> and by numerous other ecology journals. If you're as frustrated as Owen and
>> I by the recent deterioration of the peer review process, now's the time to
>> speak up and take action. Please sign the petition, and pass it on to your
>> colleagues and students.
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bio.miami.edu/asaha

=========

RESEARCH PROGRAM
c/o BILL HILTON JR. Executive Director
Hilton Pond Center for Piedmont Natural History
1432 DeVinney Road, York, South Carolina 29745 USA
office & cell (803) 684-5852
fax (803) 684-0255

Please visit our web sites (courtesy of Comporium.net):
Hilton Pond Center for Piedmont Natural History at http://www.hiltonpond.org 
"Operation RubyThroat: The Hummingbird Project" at http://www.rubythroat.org

==================

Reply via email to