Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.011260705 = product of:
  0.02252141 = sum of:
    0.02252141 = product of:
      0.04504282 = sum of:
        0.04504282 = weight(_text_:i in 356) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04504282 = score(doc=356,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15441231 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04093939 = queryNorm
            0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 356, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=356)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This position paper analyzes the current situation in scholarly publishing and peer review practices and presents three theses: (a) we are going to run out of peer reviewers; (b) it is possible to replace referees with readers, an approach that I have named "Readersourcing"; and (c) it is possible to avoid potential weaknesses in the Readersourcing model by adopting an appropriate quality control mechanism. The readersourcing.org system is then presented as an independent, third-party, nonprofit, and academic/scientific endeavor aimed at quality rating of scholarly literature and scholars, and some possible criticisms are discussed.

0.00804336 = product of:
  0.01608672 = sum of:
    0.01608672 = product of:
      0.03217344 = sum of:
        0.03217344 = weight(_text_:i in 4469) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03217344 = score(doc=4469,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15441231 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04093939 = queryNorm
            0.20836058 = fieldWeight in 4469, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4469)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)