In the last few days, I’ve been running across a bunch of activity around the question of peer review in digital publishing, thinking that’s extremely important to MediaCommons as we begin the project of building our peer-to-peer review network. I’ve also been writing about such questions a log, in particular in my book project, which I plan to begin posting excerpts from in the coming days. For the moment, however, a few links:
On “Academic Evolution,” a very strong argument by Gideon Burton indicating that our insistence that peer review is the thing that keeps academic publishing from turning into vanity publishing may be entirely wrong.
Urbis, a creative review engine for aspiring writers, using networked structures to help them develop and improve their work.
And, perhaps most significantly, if only because of its potential reach, Google Code’s GPeerReview project, which enables a network of colleagues to review and sign one another’s work, and to use statistical analysis to determine the connectedness of that work.
Are there other projects and experiments of which we should be taking note as we plot our peer-to-peer review future?