Peer Reviewed Scholarly Journals: web killer app?
Via Scripting News:
"Pet food stores weren't the killer app for the Web, but peer-reviewed scholarly journals might be."
[New York Times]
Well, I just scanned through the article, and it's hot air. Yes, some journals (and conferences) use standard systems for handling the review process, and that's very nice, but it's not "the killer app for the Web". For the past four years I've written and reviewed scientific papers, and only once have I been asked to produce a printed version -- and that was for a PhD course, where the assignment was to submit an article manuscript in the old-fashioned way. Most paper administration that I've experienced has been done by email, and a couple were handled by home-made article handling applications (that didn't always work very well).
I suspect getting such a system to work properly can be quite expensive for the receiving institution (a journal or university department), and if the occasion is a one-off conference I can easily see why most university departments wouldn't invest in such a system for the foreseable future. Parameters that may change this: The early adopters actually get these systems working, the producers get a lot of experience with implementing them at different customer sites, and editors and secretaries that used to use the tools at one department move to other departments and carry their system knowledge with them. [The Future Dr. Karlsbjerg]
9:39:28 AM 
|
|
