Quote:
Originally Posted by kovidgoyal
I agree that paying for the article is a problem, but what typically happens is that institutions make a bulk deal with the journal so their members dont have to pay. It works out cheaper for the institutions than subscriptions and also if you're an individual author, you can reduce the amount you pay by reviewing other papers for the journal. Of course this all only works for established professionals in the field.
|
Ok, that makes sense. (And those who aren't part of such an institution have a pretty hard time getting accepted in more traditional journals, I think, so no big difference in access.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovidgoyal
Incidentally, Natch how dare you criticize my work! ;-)
|
I knew I was in trouble for using real names! But remember, you can update your work to explain why NatCh's concerns about your analysis were addressed in your research design, and then NatCh can change his review.
Which means, of course, that such a system needs revision tracking, as well.
Re: anonymity: I think the identities of the reviewers can still be hidden in the kind of system I'm describing, as long as there are multiple reviewers in someone's profile. But the identity of the author of the article prior to the review could probably not easily be hidden, and that could be a problem due to the "halo" effect.