Loading…
scio14 has ended
View analytic
Thursday, February 27 • 4:00pm - 5:00pm
4B: Post-Publication Peer Review on the web: Benefits, risks and ways forward

Sign up or log in to save this to your schedule and see who's attending!

The past few years have seen the rise of anonymous sites dedicated to post-publication peer review and critiques. One of the most aggressive, Science-Fraud.org, for example, identified a number of papers that were corrected and retracted, but was shut down following legal threats. But there have been other entrants, such as PubMed Commons and PubPeer. The latter, which allows anonymous comments because junior scientists may fear reprisals, led to the correction of a high-profile stem cell cloning paper in Cell, among others. Some are even arguing for all of peer review to take place after an article is posted, saying that increased specialization by researchers, and an avalanche of studies published every week, means traditional peer review is less likely to be effective. We’ll look at these issues, including best practices (subtitle: how to avoid lawsuits), how to foster constructive criticism, and how anonymity and blogging fit into the mix.

Facilitator
avatar for Ivan Oransky

Ivan Oransky

New York University’s Arthur Carter Journalism Institute, Writer in residence
Ivan Oransky is an MD, although he doesn’t have quite enough psychiatric training to diagnose why someone would leave medicine for journalism. A cofounder of Retraction Watch, a blog about scientific retractions, Ivan is also distinguished writer in residence at New York Univer... Read More →


Thursday February 27, 2014 4:00pm - 5:00pm
Room 4 McKimmon Center
  • Hashtag #scioReview