Projects per year
Abstract
Prepublication peer review should be abolished. We consider the effects that such a change will have on the social structure of science, paying particular attention to the changed incentive structure and the likely effects on the behaviour of individual scientists. We evaluate these changes from the perspective of epistemic consequentialism. We find that where the effects of abolishing prepublication peer review can be evaluated with a reasonable level of confidence based on presently available evidence, they are either positive or neutral. We conclude that on present evidence abolishing peer review weakly dominates the status quo.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 635-663 |
Number of pages | 29 |
Journal | The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science |
Volume | 72 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Sept 2021 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Is Peer Review a Good Idea?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Projects
- 1 Finished
-
Understanding Statistical Biases in Peer Review
Heesen, R. (Investigator 01)
1/02/19 → 31/01/23
Project: Research
Press/Media
-
Ongekend Podcast Episode 4 - Is het meeste gepubliceerde onderzoek onwaar? (Remco Heesen)
Heesen, R.
21/09/21
1 item of Media coverage
Press/Media: Press / Media
-
Ipse Dixit Podcast Episode 669 - Remco Heesen & Liam Bright on Peer Review
Heesen, R. & Bright, L. K.
18/12/20
1 item of Media coverage
Press/Media: Press / Media
-