Articles

Social peer review and humanities


Abstract


The article deals with the evaluation of papers published in specialized journal of the Humanities area. Assessment techniques, qualitative (ex-ante) and quantitative (ex-post), became a fundamental instrument of the academic research. This paper traces the evolution of the evaluation techniques, describing the different methods for peer-review (a very well known praxis for the exact sciences, while still not used much in humanities for historical, epistemological, and economic reasons). Some experimental forms of peer-review are due to the digital environment and to Web 2.0, and started to be used to set up a new assessment practice for humanities. This so called social peer-review is a more appropriate to humanities, and presents many experimental examples based both on qualitative and quantitative methods. Those methods represent a valid option in order to contribute to the academic and cultural debate, and to raise up the level of the research in Humanities.


Keywords


Academic libraries; Humanities; Peer review; Research assessment; Web 2.0

Full Text:

PDF (Italiano)


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4403/jlis.it-30

NBN: http://nbn.depositolegale.it/urn%3Anbn%3Ait%3Aunifi-3784

References


Benevenuti, Giuliana. Ha ancora senso parlare di periodici di cultura? Bibliotime  13. (2010). http://didattica.spbo.unibo.it/bibliotime/num- xiii-1/benvenuti.htm. Online.

Cassella, Maria. La valutazione della ricerca nelle scienze umane. Quaderni del CNBA. (2009). http://eprints.rclis.org/17801/. Online.

—. Peer review innovations in humanities: how can scholars in A&H profit from the "wisdom of the crowds". BOBCATSSS. 2010. http://eprints.rclis.org/17800/. Online.

Cerrone,  Andrea.  Valutare  la  scienza  sociale  nell'epoca  della  società  della conoscenza. Quaderni di sociologia 53. (2009): 169181. A stampa.

Cope, Bill e Mary Kalantzis. Signs of epistemic disruption: transformations in the knowledge system of the academic journal. First Monday 6. (2009). http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2309/2163. Online.

Crossick, Geoffrey. Journals in the arts and humanities: thier role in evaluation. Serials: the journal for the serials community 20. (2007): 184187. A stampa.

De Robbio, Antonella. Analisi citazionale e indicatori bibliometrici nel modello Open Access. Bollettino AIB 47. (2007): 257288. http://eprints.rclis.org/11999/. Online.

Di Donato, Francesca. La scienza e la rete: l'uso pubblico della ragione nell'età del web. Firenze university press, 2009. http://www.fupress.com/scheda.asp?IDV=1953. Online.

Farkas, Meredith. Social software in libraries: building collaboration, communication and community online. Information Today, 2007. A stampa.

Fitzpatrick, Kathleen. CommentPress: new (social) structures for the new (net-worked) texts. Journal of electronic publishing 10. doi : 10.3998/3336451.0010.305. (2007). Online.

Garfield, Eugene e Alfred Welljams-Dorof. Citation data: their us as quantitative indicators for science and technology evaluation and policy-making. Essays of an information scientist 1992-1993. ISI press, 1993. http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v15p188y1992-93.pdf. Online.

Greaves, Sarah, et al. Nature's trial of open peer review. Nature  444. doi: 10.1038/nature05535. (2006). A stampa.

Guédon, Jean-Claude. Open Access and the divide between "mainstream" and "peripheral" science. 2007. http://www.edizioniets.com/Priv_File_Libro/558.pdf. Online.

Harnad, Stevan. The self-archiving initiative. Nature 410. (2001): 10241025. A stampa.

Koop, Thomas e Ulrich Poeschl. Systems: an open, two-stage peer-review journal: the editors of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics explain their journal approach. Nature 444. doi: 10.1038/nature04988. (2006). Online.

Kronick,  David  A.  Peer  review  in  the  18th  century  scientic  journalism. JAMA 263. (1990): 13211322. A stampa.

Lessig, Lawrence. Remix:  il  futuro  del  copyright  (e  delle  nuove  generazioni). Etas, 2009. A stampa.

Let data speak to data. Nature 438. doi : 10.1038/438531a. (2005). Online.

Maurel, Lionel. Le droit d'auteur dans l'économie de la connaissance. BBF 1. (2009): 612. http://bbf.enssib.fr/consulter/bbf-2009-01-0006-001#note-17. Online.

McCormack, Nancy. Peer review and legal publishing: what law libraries need to know about open, single blind and double blind reviewing. Law library journal 101. (2009). http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1339227. Online.

Palumbo, Riccardo, Emanuela Reale e Marco Seeber. Il finanziamento della ricerca e gli eetti sulla performance. La valutazione della ricerca pubblica. Franco Angeli, 2008. http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v15p188y1992-93.pdf. Online.

Smith, Richard. Opening up BMJ peer review. British medical journal 318. (1999). http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/318/7175/4. Online.

Taraborelli, Dario. Soft peer review: social software and distributed scientific evaluation. International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems. 2008. http://nitens.org/docs/spr_coop08.pdf. Online.

Unsworth,  John.  The  humanist:  "dances  with  wolves"  or  "bowls  alone?" Scholarly tribes and tribulations: how tradition and technology are driving disicplinary change. Association of Research Libraries, 2003. http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/unsworth.pdf. Online.

Ware, Mark e Michael Mabe. The STM report an overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing. http://www.stm-assoc.org/news.php?id=255. Online.


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2010 Maria Cassella

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Logo Università di FirenzeLogo EUMJLIS.it is a journal of the SAGAS Department, University of Florence, published by EUM, Edizioni Università di Macerata (Italy).

ISSN: 2038-1026

Openaire Logo DOAJ seal