Open peer commentary

From: (wrong string) élène.Bosc <hbosc-tchersky_at_orange.fr>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 10:39:35 +0200

I read with interest the abstract of article written by Ulrich Pöschl (see
below)  praising open peer commentary used in the periodical Atmospheric
Chemistry and Physics created in 2001. Unfortunatly I could'nt get the full
text.
But this abstract is enough to say that I totally agree with the benefits of
this "new " way of reviewing, and I will pratice it on this forum, precisely for
the Ulrich Pöschl's article.
 
 MY OPEN PEER COMMENTARY FOR  A SCIENTIFIC QUALITY ASSURANCE
 
The first point is that this "new "way of reviewing in an open journal,
detected by Ulrich Pöschl in 2001, was imagined for the first time in 1990 in
Psycholoquy, one of the first online open access journal (cf. Wikipedia ;-))
created by Stevan Harnad http://www.cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy . 
The second point is that this kind of peer review was also practiced for years
in a well known periodical with a hight IF: Behavioral Brain Science (also
created by Stevan Harnad).
Please see the editorial of BBS (2002) where you can read :"It is only now, in
the online era, that the Open Peer Commentary feature will at last come into its
own..."   http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Temp/bbs.valedict.html . 
I imagine that some details are missing in my commentary,  but I am sure that S.
Harnad will add on his turn some "open peer commentaries" on my commentaries.
 
I don't know if the 2 following references are quoted in the article, but I am
sure that  Stevan Harnad 's name, Psycholoquy and Behavioral Brain Science
should have appeared in the abstract near Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.
 
Harnad, S. (1997) Learned Inquiry and the Net: The Role of Peer Review, Peer
Commentary and Copyright. Learned Publishing 11(4) 283-292. Short version
appeared in 1997 in Antiquity 71: 1042-1048. Excerpts also appeared in the
University of Toronto Bulletin: 51(6) P. 12. http://cogprints.org/1694/

Harnad, S. (1998/2000/2004) The invisible hand of peer review. Nature [online]
(5 Nov. 1998), Exploit Interactive 5 (2000): and in Shatz, B. (2004) (ed.) Peer
Review: A Critical Inquiry. Rowland & Littlefield. Pp.235-242.
http://cogprints.org/1646/
 

Hélène Bosc

________________________________________________________________________________
 
"Interactive open access publishing and public peer review:The effectiveness of
transparency and self regulation in scientific quality assurance.
Ulrich Pöschl
http://ifl.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/36/1/40
 
The traditional forms of scientific publishing and peer review do not live up to
the demands of efficient communication and quality assurance in today?s highly
diverse and rapidly evolving world of science. They need to be complemented by
interactive and transparent forms of review, publication, and discussion that
are open to the scientific community and to the public. The advantages of open
access, public peer review and interactive discussion can be efficiently and
flexibly combined with the strengths of traditional publishing and peer review.
Since 2001 the benefits and viability of this approach are clearly demonstrated
by the highly successful interactive open access journal Atmospheric Chemistry
and Physics (ACP, www.atmoschem-phys.net) and a growing number of sister
journals launched by the publisher Copernicus (www.copernicus.org) and the
European Geosciences Union (EGU, www.egu.eu). These journals are practicing a
two-stage process of publication and peer review combined with interactive
public discussion, which effectively resolves the dilemma between rapid
scientific exchange and thorough quality assurance. The same or similar concepts
have recently also been adopted in other disciplines, including the life
sciences and economics. Note, however, that alternative approaches where
interactive commenting and public discussion are not fully integrated with
formal peer review by designated referees tend to be less successful. The
principles, key aspects and achievements of interactive open access publishing
(top quality and impact, efficient self-regulation and low rejection rates,
little waste and low cost) are outlined and discussed. Further information is
available on the internet:
www.atmospheric-chemistry-and-physics.net/general_information/
public_relations.html

________________________________________________________________________________
 
 
 
Received on Thu May 20 2010 - 13:12:07 BST