What is Wrong with Scientific Publishing, and How do We Fix It?

What’s Wrong with Scientific Publishing, and How do We Fix It?
Part 3: Opening Peer Review

Thursday, Jan 24
4 pm – 5:30 pm (Refreshments 3:40 pm)
106 Spalding Lab, Hartley Memorial Seminar Room

The peer review process is undeniably critical to progress in research, yet it is often criticized for being slow, biased, and lacking in accountability.  In addition, controversy regarding the process abounds given the new technologies, increasing volume of manuscripts and unsustainable journal price increases.   In response, many scientists, especially young researchers, are calling for a more open, democratic, and transparent peer review process.  What does open peer review look like, and can it really live up to its promise?  Hear about new models being used in environmental science, atmospheric chemistry and economics, and join in a discussion of the possibilities.

Panelists

Tapio Schneider, Assistant Professor of Environmental Science and Engineering

John Seinfeld, Louis E. Nohl Professor & Professor of Chemical Engineering

R. Preston McAfee, J. Stanley Johnson Professor of Business Economics and Management