Cargando…
Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation
In this paper we review several novel approaches for research evaluation. We start with a brief overview of the peer review, its controversies, and metrics for assessing efficiency and overall quality of the peer review. We then discuss five approaches, including reputation-based ones, that come out...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Research Foundation
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3237011/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22174702 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2011.00056 |
_version_ | 1782218829751910400 |
---|---|
author | Birukou, Aliaksandr Wakeling, Joseph Rushton Bartolini, Claudio Casati, Fabio Marchese, Maurizio Mirylenka, Katsiaryna Osman, Nardine Ragone, Azzurra Sierra, Carles Wassef, Aalam |
author_facet | Birukou, Aliaksandr Wakeling, Joseph Rushton Bartolini, Claudio Casati, Fabio Marchese, Maurizio Mirylenka, Katsiaryna Osman, Nardine Ragone, Azzurra Sierra, Carles Wassef, Aalam |
author_sort | Birukou, Aliaksandr |
collection | PubMed |
description | In this paper we review several novel approaches for research evaluation. We start with a brief overview of the peer review, its controversies, and metrics for assessing efficiency and overall quality of the peer review. We then discuss five approaches, including reputation-based ones, that come out of the research carried out by the LiquidPub project and research groups collaborated with LiquidPub. Those approaches are alternative or complementary to traditional peer review. We discuss pros and cons of the proposed approaches and conclude with a vision for the future of the research evaluation, arguing that no single system can suit all stakeholders in various communities. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3237011 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Frontiers Research Foundation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-32370112011-12-15 Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation Birukou, Aliaksandr Wakeling, Joseph Rushton Bartolini, Claudio Casati, Fabio Marchese, Maurizio Mirylenka, Katsiaryna Osman, Nardine Ragone, Azzurra Sierra, Carles Wassef, Aalam Front Comput Neurosci Neuroscience In this paper we review several novel approaches for research evaluation. We start with a brief overview of the peer review, its controversies, and metrics for assessing efficiency and overall quality of the peer review. We then discuss five approaches, including reputation-based ones, that come out of the research carried out by the LiquidPub project and research groups collaborated with LiquidPub. Those approaches are alternative or complementary to traditional peer review. We discuss pros and cons of the proposed approaches and conclude with a vision for the future of the research evaluation, arguing that no single system can suit all stakeholders in various communities. Frontiers Research Foundation 2011-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC3237011/ /pubmed/22174702 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2011.00056 Text en Copyright © 2011 Birukou, Wakeling, Bartolini, Casati, Marchese, Mirylenka, Osman, Ragone, Sierra and Wassef. http://www.frontiersin.org/licenseagreement This is an open-access article subject to a non-exclusive license between the authors and Frontiers Media SA, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and other Frontiers conditions are complied with. |
spellingShingle | Neuroscience Birukou, Aliaksandr Wakeling, Joseph Rushton Bartolini, Claudio Casati, Fabio Marchese, Maurizio Mirylenka, Katsiaryna Osman, Nardine Ragone, Azzurra Sierra, Carles Wassef, Aalam Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation |
title | Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation |
title_full | Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation |
title_fullStr | Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation |
title_full_unstemmed | Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation |
title_short | Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation |
title_sort | alternatives to peer review: novel approaches for research evaluation |
topic | Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3237011/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22174702 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2011.00056 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT birukoualiaksandr alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation AT wakelingjosephrushton alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation AT bartoliniclaudio alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation AT casatifabio alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation AT marchesemaurizio alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation AT mirylenkakatsiaryna alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation AT osmannardine alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation AT ragoneazzurra alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation AT sierracarles alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation AT wassefaalam alternativestopeerreviewnovelapproachesforresearchevaluation |