Decentralized Peer Review in Open Science: A Mechanism Proposal

Andreas Finke and Thomas Hensel

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: Peer review is a laborious, yet essential, part of academic publishing with crucial impact on the scientific endeavor. The current lack of incentives and transparency harms the credibility of this process. Researchers are neither rewarded for superior nor penalized for bad reviews. Additionally, confidential reports cause a loss of insights and make the review process vulnerable to scientific misconduct. We propose a community-owned and -governed system that 1) remunerates reviewers for their efforts, 2) publishes the (anonymized) reports for scrutiny by the community, 3) tracks reputation of reviewers and 4) provides digital certificates. Automated by transparent smart-contract blockchain technology, the system aims to increase quality and speed of peer review while lowering the chance and impact of erroneous judgements.

Date: 2024-04
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-sog
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2404.18148 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:2404.18148

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().