Friday, February 04, 2011

This isn't peer review

The End Of The Pier Show: "I reject at least four in every five manuscripts straight off the bat"

Nature's credibility now in tatters. Same editorial policy as the Daily Mail?


  1. Even as a domain specialist I really need to read a paper a second time to write up my referee report (reject, major, or minor)... how can a general editor do that without actually refereeing the paper...

  2. Agreed. I just commented on Henry's post:
    "If you’re telling us peer review is broken, I’d agree. If you’re telling us contributions to Nature are peer reviewed, I’d disagree."