Cambridge University Press is launching a new open-access journal to help address science’s reproducibility issues and glacial peer-review timelines. The journal will publish reviewers’ names and reviews to make the process more transparent.
https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2019/09/18/new-journal-focused-reproducibility
In a recent paper, I wrote: "Too many recent studies have lacked a strong conceptual foundation, have suffered from design and content compromises, or have been conducted by researchers who lack sophistication in the technology they proposed to use. The resulting weak studies, even if they achieve blind review publication, often cannot be reproduced, indicating that they were not truly generalizable findings and thus do not benefit future curriculum, instructional, and technology design to produce positive student outcomes." -- From Article Meta-analysis of MALL research and design
Michael - why not? Horses for courses. Let publishers, editors and reviewers decide. I am an Associate Editor for BMC Public Health. The names of authors/reviewers are known - and I have no problem with that. Transparency can be a good thing - especially when it comes to 'weeding out' good from bad publishing companies.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals