Re: Hoax Article Accepted by OA Bentham Journal

[Thomas Krichel <krichel@openlib.org>]

B.G. Sloan writes

> Thomas Krichel writes: "...we all know that peer review is a 
> vague concept to the point of being useless."
>
> Really? I don't mean to sound naive or skeptical. Can Thomas 
> Krichel point us to some empirical studies that show peer 
> review is useless?

Can B.G. Sloan point us to some empirical studies that measure 
the extend of usefulness of peer review?

I have not studied the empirical evidence that is formally 
published. I have seen enough errors in peer reviewed papers 
personally but I can't spend my time elaborating here where these 
errors are. I don't think there is a need to do this. "Peer 
reviewed" means some presumed peers have reviewed the paper. The 
concept of a "peer" is vague. The concept of a "review" is vague. 
The combination of two vague concepts is even more vague...

Cheers,

Thomas Krichel                    http://openlib.org/home/krichel
                               RePEc:per:1965-06-05:thomas_krichel
new phone: +7 913 748 8056                   skype: thomaskrichel