Hauser M, Fehr E (2007) An Incentive Solution to the Peer Review Problem. PLoS Biol 5(4): e107
doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050107
http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0050107&ct=1
Despite the Internet facilities, peer review generally continues to be a long process. The authors of this note propose a system of incentives and punishments for reviewers according to times of their response to the editorial deadlines. Time for review will be maintained in the referees database and the future articles submitted by reviewers will be processed immediately or with delay according to the circumstance. All positive and negative aspects of the suggested procedure are discussed.
Editors' Note: The problems with the peer review process are a source of endless discussion within the scientific community. This solution to delayed reviews seems innovative, if not necessarily practical. Edotors of PLOS Biol encourage comments online through our Reader Response facility, rather than via formal submission to PLoS Biology.
doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050107
http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0050107&ct=1
Despite the Internet facilities, peer review generally continues to be a long process. The authors of this note propose a system of incentives and punishments for reviewers according to times of their response to the editorial deadlines. Time for review will be maintained in the referees database and the future articles submitted by reviewers will be processed immediately or with delay according to the circumstance. All positive and negative aspects of the suggested procedure are discussed.
Editors' Note: The problems with the peer review process are a source of endless discussion within the scientific community. This solution to delayed reviews seems innovative, if not necessarily practical. Edotors of PLOS Biol encourage comments online through our Reader Response facility, rather than via formal submission to PLoS Biology.
Comments