2009/8/25 Stevan Harnad <amsciforum_at_gmail.com>:
> [Hyperlinked version of this posting:
> http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/621-guid.html ]
(1) Peer Review is absolutely overestimated. In the humanities there
is outside the anglo-american world few peer review.
(2) Scholars need all publications OA in which the essential scholarly
progress is made. In the humanities these are monographs and
contributions in books/conference proceedings. Most of these are not
peer-reviewed.
(3) It is wrong to think that all relevant research is made from
university affiliated scholars. It would be good to have valid numbers
for scholars without deposit access to an institutional repository.
(4) Institutional repositories are NOT better than central
disciplinary repositories. Repetition makes false things not true.
Klaus Graf
Received on Tue Aug 25 2009 - 21:15:32 BST