Post-publication peer review: Difference between revisions
From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
(see also) |
(see also) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
* [[BE_Board:Dinner_Discussion/Alternate_publishing_models|brief discussion notes on alternative publishing models]] | * [[BE_Board:Dinner_Discussion/Alternate_publishing_models|brief discussion notes on alternative publishing models]] | ||
* [[OpenWetWare:Information management/a model for novel publishing]] | * [[OpenWetWare:Information management/a model for novel publishing]] | ||
* [http://blog.openwetware.org/community/2008/02/03/what-would-be-your-top-5-priorities-from-a-new-style-publishing-system/ discussion on publication on OWW blogs 2008] | |||
Revision as of 04:13, 29 October 2012
Almost all scientific articles are currently reviewed before publication. This leads to sometimes dramatic delays in the public access to the information and in rare, extreme cases to purposeful delay of publication by self-interested reviewers. Alternatives exist like the popular physics and mathematics pre-print server arXiv but have no widely used equivalent in the life sciences. Nevertheless, new initiatives are under way in our fields which we will try to document here. Feel free to edit this page with your comments and findings.
