The SciPost seems to be a new publishing platform with rather unusual peer review procedure -- fully open. It means that names of authors/editors/referees are known to the public at any stage. My colleagues expressed an opinion that it cannot be productive. Therefore my question: can SciPost be considered a reliable and serious publisher competing with journals beyond the paywall?
Asked
Active
Viewed 2,824 times
7
-
There are other publishers and journals performing open peer-review, so this part is not new/unique. – FuzzyLeapfrog Jun 28 '18 at 09:38
-
The question in the title is not the same as the question you are asking. May I suggest editing so that they match? ;-) – Flyto Jun 29 '18 at 07:18
-
@Flyto Please, feel free to edit the post. I was hesitant to put "Can SciPost be considered a reliable venue?" in the title---it can be perceived as too opinionated. "What is SciPost?", however, calls for objective answers. – yarchik Jun 29 '18 at 13:05
2 Answers
7
In SciPost, the texts of the reviews are publicly available, but the reviewers can stay anonymous, and most of them do, as far as I can tell.
With 153 published articles so far, including by well-known authors such as Cardy, Verlinde, Rychkov, Seiberg, etc, it is clear that the journal has a good reputation among researchers. The challenge is now to become financially sustainable, while remaining free to authors and readers.
Another journal that practices a form of open peer review is PeerJ.
Sylvain Ribault
- 2,132
- 7
- 11
5
Only time will tell. It seems like an initiative supported by serious partners. In order for it to become successful, it will need a critical mass of interesting articles, and avoid serous mishaps. Whether that will happen is hard to predict.
Maarten Buis
- 43,487
- 8
- 87
- 152
-
Addionally, this highly depends on the scientists reading, reviewing, editing and publishing with SciPost. It's the community that decides whether it will work or not. – FuzzyLeapfrog Jun 28 '18 at 09:40