Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
There's some interesting issues at work here.

I gave up on research into the NHS as a field of work because the pre-print culture wasn't developed enough - and changes were happening far more quickly than the journal turn-around time.

(All the worse because journal turn around in these smaller subjects is longer - best part of a year last time I checked...)

It made the work pointless, with no chance of influencing anything.

On the other hand, we've seen with Reinhart and Rogoff that the culture of pre-prints in economics allows massive propaganda exercises to be undertaken. People take pre-prints seriously, despite the lack of review.

(Of course as pre-prints rise, then the journals have no incentive to get any faster, either...)

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Tue Aug 5th, 2014 at 07:48:20 AM EST
It's not fair to blame the pre-print system for Reinhart and Rogoff. Judging by the quality of the statistics work in econ papers I've read, they would have had a better than even chance of getting through formal peer review.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Aug 5th, 2014 at 03:15:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Fair point - econ is broken, but I don't think preprint is helping...
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Tue Aug 5th, 2014 at 06:46:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series