Problems with “natural selection of academic papers”
- 207 Downloads
In this short communication we give critical comments on the paper of Perakakis et al. (Scientometrics 85(2):553–559, 2010) on “Natural selection of academic papers”. The criticism mainly focusses on their unbalanced criticism of peer review and their negative evaluation of the link of peer review with commercial publishing.
KeywordsPeer review Commercial publishing Open access
- Antelman, K. (2004). Do open-access articles have a greater research impact? College and Research Libraries, 65(5), 372–382.Google Scholar
- Bornmann, L., & Egghe, L. (2011). Journal peer review as an information retrieval process. Preprint.Google Scholar
- Davis, P. (2011). http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/author/pmd8/.
- Meyer, C. A. (2010). Researcher tools for evaluating trustworthiness: CrossCheck plagiarism screening and CrossMark. Library Connect, 3(1), 7.Google Scholar
- Rousseau, R. (2006). After the journal impact factor and the web impact factor a referee factor enters the fray: Some comments. ISSI Newsletter, 2(2), 2–3.Google Scholar