Peer review is the cornerstone of scientific publishing in economics and more broadly, but data issues have inhibited past efforts to study it. To address this challenge, my coauthors and I combine insights from a novel survey dataset documenting the submission and review activity of over 1,400 researchers with observational evidence on how peer review in economics compares to the evaluation processes in other disciplines. In this talk, I will discuss the main takeaways of our efforts, with an emphasis on exploring three key trade-offs that govern any attempts at reform: (i) the appropriate balance between relying on expert opinions and seeking input from a diverse pool of referees; (ii) the challenge of reducing turnaround time while maintaining rigor in peer review; and (iii) the difficulty of increasing the transparency of evaluations while preserving confidentiality. I will then conclude by outlining possible steps to reform some of these issues as well as the pro and cons of those potential policies.
Lördag 10 november 16.15-17.00 OSU hälsar Adam Gill med föredrag ‘Resource Allocation, Timing, and Transparency in Peer Review: A Case Study of Economics Researchers’. Fler info på https://bit.ly/open_science_uppsala
Lördag 8 september 16.15-17.00 hälsar Open Science Uppsala Adam Gill med föredrag ‘Resource Allocation, Timing, and Transparency in Peer Review: A Case Study of Economics Researchers’.
Open Science Uppsala är den lokala Open Science grupp, var man diskuterar om -duh!- Open Science. Open Science är en väg att forskning med -bland annat- mål att göra forskning mer reproducerbar. Var föredragare pratar om en aspekt av Open Science, oft illustrerad med exempel av hans/hons egen interesse.
Varje en som omfamnar den vetenskaplig metod är välkommen om att berömma och kritiserar Open Science.
Fler info på https://bit.ly/open_science_uppsala
