Top News, Articles, and Interviews in Philosophy

Improving our current peer-review process

Philosophy News image
As I'm sure most of the blog's readers know, I've advocated for dramatic changes to our peer-review system--ones I've argued would be likely to benefits authors, reviewers, editors, and the profession. While some surprising changes in policies by European funding agencies might push things in the direction I've advocated (though that remains to be seen), a fair number of readers have asked whether it might make more sense--at least in the short-term--to examine less radical ways we might improve our current system of peer-review. A few comments the last several days got me thinking more about this. First, Angry Anon wrote: I send only to generalist journals that I know are quick (1-2 months), and after that only to specialist journals that I know are quick (and are usually quicker). Here's the real question though - and maybe we could start a separate post for answering this question - why are you, as a referee, taking longer than 3 weeks to review a. . .

Continue reading . . .

News source: The Philosophers' Cocoon

blog comments powered by Disqus