Bora Zivkovic’s job is to try to get people to comment on articles in PLoS ONE, the new online journal designed to get articles in front of the public quickly.
According to their journal information page, an important part of their peer review process is community review. Indeed, the journal only requires review by a single editor before publication. One commenter on Zivkovic’s blog post about the process suggests that this is an inadequate level of peer review:
My current view is that with PLoS ONE, if you have $1250, you have a published paper.
Zivkovic’s response is that all articles are fully reviewed, that reviewers don’t know whether the publication fee has been waived, and that half of all submissions are rejected, while many are revised several times before publication.
While that may be true, PLoS ONE would not qualify as peer-reviewed under the standards I’ve proposed for BPR3 (a minimum of two reviewers in addition to the journal editor prior to publication). Yet one commenter suggests that even those standards “widen” the concept of peer review.
As more journals try out the concept of community review of publications, will the concept of “peer review” become even more difficult to define? How will BPR3 fit in in an increasingly ambiguous academic world? Share your thoughts with us in the comments section.