Message 00544 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00529 Message: 8/12 L6 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [jox] Identity of reviewers



On 06/05/2011 09:39 PM, Athina Karatzogianni wrote:
[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
If the reviewers have the option to remain anonymous, and their comments not
to be widely disseminated and the authors under review have the option to
not have the reviews widely published and the first version of their paper
not published, then I would agree with Toni's scheme of things. In which
case, authors and reviewers should be clearly informed from the outset what
the overall procedure is and what their options are (to remain or not
anonymous, to have or not to have their comments published, and whether the
original version is published or not etc).

On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Toni Prug <tony> wrote:

will it be mandatory to publish the first draft of essay

i don't think it should be. quite a few authors are a likely to feel
anxious about it, especially at the time where such culture does not exist
in the social sciences and humanities. however, we can encourage it and
leave it to authors to decide. If peer reviews are published and the authors
reference them in the final published version, the points of contributions
will be known. The actual magnitude, qualitative nature of contributions
made by the reviews can only fully be exposed by publishing the first
version. Alternatively, we can encourage authors to note in the footnotes a
bit more detail on how reviewers' comments influenced each major change
applied to the final published version.


Gabriella Coleman, Assistant Professor
NYU, Department of Media, Culture, & Communication
On Leave 2010-2011, The Institute for Advanced Study

Thread: joxT00529 Message: 8/12 L6 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00544 [Homepage] [Navigation]