Premium
Why Not Open the Black Box of Journal Editing in Philosophy? Make Peer Reviews of Published Papers Available
Author(s) -
Schaffalitzky de Muckadell Caroline,
Petersen Esben Nedenskov
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
metaphilosophy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.475
H-Index - 35
eISSN - 1467-9973
pISSN - 0026-1068
DOI - 10.1111/meta.12240
Subject(s) - transparency (behavior) , anonymity , computer science , reliability (semiconductor) , epistemology , philosophy , computer security , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics
Despite general agreement within philosophy that peer review is indispensable, its fairness and reliability is often questioned. This article suggests that such worries can to a large extent be met by adopting the practice that reviews as well as earlier versions of papers are made publicly available when the final version of a paper is published. This suggestion combines the advantages of transparency with the merits of anonymity of reviewers. While there are obstacles to this suggestion, the article argues that it would be worthwhile to implement it because it can help map patterns of conduct and secure confidence in the fairness and reliability of review procedures and journal editing within philosophy.