There are two areas in scientific publishing that need improvement. One is peer review, and the other is transparent information about author contributions to a manuscript. In his Editorial in Angewandte Chemie, Richard N. Zare from Stanford University, CA, USA, discusses these two areas.
Zare points out that with the greater number of submitted papers and the larger demands on referees’ time, obtaining quality referee reports is becoming more difficult and referees need some sort of recognition for their valuable work. Zare proposes that, instead of adopting a double-blind process, journals publish lists of their referees and how many reports they write. He also believes that all authors of a paper should explicitly state their contributions to the work in order to make the publishing process more transparent. This would also help when making decisions about awards or promotions.
- Better Practices in Scientific Publishing,
Richard N. Zare,
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2015.
Also of Interest
- Video: R. Zare on China,
Richard Zare, Stanford University, USA, discusses why the West should help China develop its science
- List of ChemistryViews.org articles on Publishing Skills