David S. Stodolsky
In scientific consensus journals, all articles are published and the reader benefits from article selection based upon impartial refereeing. An additional benefit is that the negotiation process, which typically occurs prior to publication, is automated, thus saving efforts of participants. Readers submit reviews that evaluate articles on agreed dimensions. A statistical procedure is used to identify the most knowledgeable representative of each consensus position, and these persons are invited to submit articles that justify the review judgments they have submitted. A major advantage of this approach is the ability to develop reputation without article publication. The approach includes a protection mechanism based upon pseudonyms, which substitutes for the protection of anonymity typical to scientific journals. This reduces the potential for irresponsible behavior and facilitates reputation development. The level of quality enhancement is superior to that achievable with anonymous peer review. Eliminating the editor and the delay associated with conventional refereeing makes message quality enhancement available in message systems for educational and business environments.
Back | TIS Home