Current system literately is killing the science by allowing a clique of academics who already have some positions (and largely cite one another) to block innovative and useful papers of their competitors. You all know that this is happening, and this is something reactionary and retrogradive, and definitely is NOT in the public interest.
The model suggested by Richard Price (on top of all other benefits) makes it impossible to block someone else’s work and allows the works which are better to “survive” the test of time, i.e. community peer review, and I would add usefulness and applicability. For example,
Popper (1957) asserts that theoretical frameworks that better “survive” the process of refutation are more applicable to the problem situations in real life.
It's time for a change!
----- Original Message -----From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">Mohammad Zakaria PezeshkiTo: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 7:14 AMSubject: Scientific Publishing Is Killing Science
http://www.psmag.com/navigation/nature-and-technology/scientific-publishing-killing-science-75694
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24372677
--
Mohammad Zakaria Pezeshki, M.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Community Medicine,
Tabriz Medical School, Golgasht Avenue, Tabriz, Iran,
Tel: 0098 411 336 46 73
Fax: 0098 411 336 46 68