Peer Review: Achieving Generosity of Spirit in a Time of Scarcity

CSR Director's Seminar The process of peer review is at the fulcrum of the hypercompetitive US funding climate. Scarcity has exaggerated the problems with review. To address these, we have to ask fundamental questions: What should be the criteria for funding? How can we choose the best reviewers? Who should provide leadership during the review process? The criteria must be related to the goals. I (Dr. Kirschner) have written recently, “within the context of some responsible structure of scientific funding and publication every effort should be made to nourish the iconoclast, including the researcher who is straying outside his or her own discipline.” This generally does not happen. When reviewers are chosen for their expertise, rather than their judgment, the choices that are made too often focus on feasibility, rather than originality. We often ignore the role of simple but powerful approaches like exploration and description in favor of paths with known deliverables or those that employ advanced technology. Leadership on the review committees by the chairs is quite variable and suggestions about evaluation are intentionally not provided by review officers who are typically very discrete; such enforced discretion may contribute to poor decisions. Many outside policies converge on this delicate process. Simple fairness in peer review is not a guarantor of a successful outcome for American science. It needs more than that. The natural expectation is that t...
Source: Videocast - All Events - Category: Journals (General) Tags: Upcoming Events Source Type: video