Abstract
Blind peer review has become the gold standard of many scholarly disciplines. However, this seems like a paradox since openness is deeply embedded in the DNA of research. Over the last 30 years changes in the managerial paradigms of academia have also induced so many changes in the ecosystem of scholarly communication that many scholars describe the present situation as a crisis. Therefore, in light of the availability of new technologies and the changes in the scholarly communication ecosystems, it might be time to review how we assess research quality and address the paradox of the blindness of peer review.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Geography, Planning and Development
Reference28 articles.
1. The history of the peer-review process
2. Shema, H (2014). he birth of modern peer review. Scientific American. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/information-culture/the-birth-of-modern-peer-review/
3. Growth rates of modern science: a latent piecewise growth curve approach to model publication numbers from established and new literature databases
4. Al-Mousawi, Y (2020) A brief history of peer review. F1000blognetwork, 31 January 2020. https://blog.f1000.com/2020/01/31/a-brief-history-of-peer-review/
5. Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure