Content deleted Content added
m Revent moved page User:Squitz/sandbox to Draft:Publons: Preferred ___location for AfC submissions |
|||
Line 11:
== Reception ==
TechCrunch remarked that lack of transparency leads to many problems in the publication process, and Publons purports to help with that <ref>{{cite news|last1=Shu|first1=Catherine|title=Academic Startup Publons Gives Peer Reviewers Credit For Their Work|url=http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/08/academic-startup-publons-gives-peer-reviewers-credit-for-their-work/|accessdate=5 September 2014|work=Techcrunch}}</ref>. ResearchInformation noted that while the site supports both pre- and post-publication review, not all reviews are published in deference to existing publication norms <ref>{{cite web|last1=Harris|first1=Sian|title=Tracking and Validating Reviews|url=http://www.researchinformation.info/features/feature.php?feature_id=448|website=Reasearch Informaiton|publisher=Europa Science Limited|accessdate=5 September 2014}}</ref>. Nature noted that peer review is an important job, and reports on the reactions of two of Publons's most prolific reviewers <ref>{{cite web|last1=van Noorden|first1=Richard|title=The scientists who get credit for peer review|url=http://www.nature.com/news/the-scientists-who-get-credit-for-peer-review-1.16102|website=Nature|publisher=Nature Publishing Group|accessdate=9 October 2014}}</ref>.
== Other information ==
| |||