Collaborative Document Evaluation : An Alternative Approach to Classic Peer Review
نویسندگان
چکیده
review. However, peer review has limitations in evaluating research papers. In this paper, Scienstein and the new idea of " collaborative document evaluation " are presented. Scienstein is a project to evaluate scientific papers collaboratively based on ratings, links, annotations and classifications by the scientific community using the internet. In this paper, critical success factors of collaborative document evaluation are analyzed. That is the scientists " motivation to participate as reviewers, the reviewers " competence and the reviewers " trustworthiness. It is shown that if these factors are ensured, collaborative document evaluation may prove to be a more objective, faster and less resource intensive approach to scientific document evaluation in comparison to the classical peer review process. It is shown that additional advantages exist as collaborative document evaluation supports interdisciplinary work, allows continuous post-publishing quality assessments and enables the implementation of academic recommendation engines. In the long term, it seems possible that collaborative document evaluation will successively substitute peer review and decrease the need for journals.
منابع مشابه
Collaborative Document Evaluation: An Alternative Approach to Classic Peer Review
Research papers are usually evaluated via peer review. However, peer review has limitations in evaluating research papers. In this paper, Scienstein and the new idea of ‘collaborative document evaluation’ are presented. Scienstein is a project to evaluate scientific papers collaboratively based on ratings, links, annotations and classifications by the scientific community using the internet. In...
متن کاملThe Potential of Collaborative Document Evaluation for Science (free pre print version)
Peer review and citation analysis are the two most common approaches for quality evaluations of scientific publications, although they are subject to criticism for various reasons. This paper outlines the problems of citation analysis and peer review and introduces Collaborative Document Evaluation as a supplement or possibly even a substitute. Collaborative Document Evaluation aims to enable t...
متن کاملA survey on Automatic Text Summarization
Text summarization endeavors to produce a summary version of a text, while maintaining the original ideas. The textual content on the web, in particular, is growing at an exponential rate. The ability to decipher through such massive amount of data, in order to extract the useful information, is a major undertaking and requires an automatic mechanism to aid with the extant repository of informa...
متن کاملThe Potential of Collaborative Document Evaluation for Science
Peer review and citation analysis are the two most common approaches for quality evaluations of scientific publications, although they are subject to criticism for various reasons. This paper outlines the problems of citation analysis and peer review and introduces Collaborative Document Evaluation as a supplement or possibly even a substitute. Collaborative Document Evaluation aims to enable t...
متن کاملPeer review for biomedical publications: we can improve the system
The lack of formal training programs for peer reviewers places the scientific quality of biomedical publications at risk, as the introduction of 'hidden' bias may not be easily recognized by the reader. The exponential increase in the number of manuscripts submitted for publication worldwide, estimated in the millions annually, overburdens the capability of available qualified referees. Indeed,...
متن کامل