Is Living Easier With Eyes Closed?

IF 0.8 4区社会学 Q2 AREA STUDIES

European Review Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI:10.1017/s1062798723000558

Charlotte Wien

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Blind peer review has become the gold standard of many scholarly disciplines. However, this seems like a paradox since openness is deeply embedded in the DNA of research. Over the last 30 years changes in the managerial paradigms of academia have also induced so many changes in the ecosystem of scholarly communication that many scholars describe the present situation as a crisis. Therefore, in light of the availability of new technologies and the changes in the scholarly communication ecosystems, it might be time to review how we assess research quality and address the paradox of the blindness of peer review.

查看原文本刊更多论文

闭着眼睛生活更容易吗？

盲目的同行评审已成为许多学术学科的黄金标准。然而，这似乎是一个悖论，因为开放性深深植根于研究的基因之中。在过去的 30 年里，学术界管理模式的变化也引发了学术交流生态系统的诸多变化，以至于许多学者将目前的状况描述为一场危机。因此，鉴于新技术的可用性和学术交流生态系统的变化，也许是时候重新审视我们如何评估研究质量并解决同行评审盲目性的悖论了。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

European Review AREA STUDIES-

CiteScore

1.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The European Review is a unique interdisciplinary international journal covering a wide range of subjects. It has a strong emphasis on Europe and on economics, history, social science, and general aspects of the sciences. At least two issues each year are devoted mainly or entirely to a single subject and deal in depth with a topic of contemporary importance in Europe; the other issues cover a wide range of subjects but may include a mini-review. Past issues have dealt with: Who owns the Human Genome; From decolonisation to post-colonialism; The future of the welfare state; Democracy in the 21st century; False confessions after repeated interrogation; Living in real and virtual worlds.