Real peer review has never been tried - Works in Progress

Outdated forms of peer review create bottlenecks that slow down science. But in a world where research can now circulate rapidly on the Internet, we need to develop new ways to do science in public.

For most of the twentieth century, science looked very different from the way it does today. For one, the internet did not exist. If researchers wanted to share their work with one another, they would meet in person – at conferences and seminars – or circulate their work through print – in letters, books, or journals. But journals, too, worked very differently. Few studies went through ‘peer review’, the procedure where, after a scientist submits their paper to a journal, the editor sends it out to other scientists, who provide feedback and recommend whether the paper should be published. The

saved by

• Darren Zhu
• Eli Qian
• Danish

related reading

• Real peer review has never been tried - Works in Progress Magazineworksinprogress.co
• The rise and fall of peer review - by Adam Mastroianniexperimentalhistory.substack.com
• Three myths about scientific peer review – Michael Nielsenmichaelnielsen.org
• The speed of science - Works in Progress Magazineworksinprogress.co
• Decentralizing Journals and Peer Review DAOs | Out-Of-Pocketoutofpocket.health
• The Problems With Science Journals Trying to Be Gatekeepers – and Some Solutions – The Wire Sciencescience.thewire.in
• How Life Sciences Actually Work: Findings of a Year-Long Investigation - Alexey Guzeyguzey.com
• A Vision of Metasciencescienceplusplus.org
• Could Gambling Save Science?mason.gmu.edu
• An invitation to a secret society - by Adam Mastroianniexperimental-history.com
• A Vision of Metasciencescienceplusplus.org
• Is Science Stagnant? - The Atlantictheatlantic.com