Research Excellence Framework: outcomes of consultation and next steps

http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/circlets/2008/cl13_08/
1.   From November 2007 to February 2008, we consulted on the future research assessment and funding framework – the Research Excellence Framework (REF) – that will be the successor to the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise (RAE).
2.   We received 274 responses to the HEFCE consultation paper (338 including responses sent to the other funding bodies). Respondents included all [...]

Soft peer review? Social software and distributed scientific evaluation

http://nitens.org/docs/spr_coop08.pdf
Abstract The debate on the prospects of peer-review in the Internet age and the
increasing criticism leveled against the dominant role of impact factor
indicators are calling for new measurable criteria to assess scientific quality.
Usage-based metrics offer a new avenue to scientific quality assessment but
face the same risks as first generation search engines that used unreliable
metrics (such [...]

Reducing the cost of facilitating peer review

Martijn J. Schuemie and Jan A. Kors, Jane: Suggesting Journals, Finding Experts, Bioinformatics, January 28, 2008.
Abstract:   With an exponentially growing number of articles being published every year, scientists can use some help in determining which journal is most appropriate for publishing their results, and which other scientists can be called upon [...]

Peer review in scholarly journals

http://www.publishingresearch.net/documents/PeerReviewFullPRCReport-final.pdf
Perspective of the scholarly community – an international study
Mark Ware Consulting Ltd
This work was commissioned and funded by the Publishing Research Consortium
This global survey reports on the attitudes and behaviour of 3040 academics in relation to peer review in journals.
Peer review is seen as an essential component of scholarly communication, the mechanism that facilitates the [...]