Reading panel

In the scientific disciplines , the reading panels indicate groups of Enquiring S which carry out a critical work on work of their pars for the account of scientific magazines, of scientific conferences or for public institutions (e.g. CNRS) or private (like a foundation) charged to evaluate scientific projects.

In sciences known as exact, the reading panels forms integral part of the scientific Démarche. The normal course of a new result since its discovery until its recognition by the Scientific community passes indeed by the Publication of work which made it possible to succeed to it in scientific magazines where they will be subjected to the criticism of the researchers working in the same field. Traditionally, the diffusion of the scientific work is done primarily through conferences and of account-returned written which, in order to be accepted must initially be the attentive criticism object by a restricted number of Expert S named by the organizer of the conference or the leading Comité of the scientific magazine.

Certain scientific magazines pushed the system of the reading panel until inviting a very great number even the unit of the researchers of the field to criticize the articles which they publish: it is the comment open to the pars . Only criticisms considered to be most interesting are finally published with the original article like, often, a response of the authors to their criticisms. It is, for example, the case of the review Behavioral and Brain Sciences .

The appearance of the systems of publications to open Accès slightly changed gives it as regards scientific diffusion. Indeed, according to this system, the subjected articles are directly published and are freely accessible to the other researchers without to be evaluated as a preliminary by a reading panel. However, this system is sometimes associated with a system of open comments. See for example the site ArXiv (pronconcer files ). In the case of the arXiv however there exist some rules restricting the tender slightly: indeed an article must be subjected since a Email address lodged by a scientific Institution and an author publishing for the first time must successfully see his tender endorsed by a person having already subjected an article.

Justification of the reading panels

Operation

In the case of a publication in a scientific Newspaper, the manuscript proposed by one or more researchers is received by one of the editors of the newspaper. The editors are personalities of the world of the research, often voluntary, whose role is to choose the members of the reading panel and to ensure the communication between these relecteurs and the authors of the article.

With the reception of the manuscript, the editor decides, after a speed reading, if the article is potentially publishable in the newspaper. According to the specific criteria of publication to each review, the relevance of the mentioned question and the interest of the results for the readers of the newspaper are evaluated. The proportion of manuscripts returned to the authors during this first phase is strongly dependant on the selectivity of the newspapers; multidisciplinary newspapers like Natural or Science for example claim to reject 90% of the articles at this stage.

If the editor decides to continue the process, he contacts several (generally two) universally recognized specialists, whose profile corresponds to the topics and the techniques approached in the article. These specialists lay out then a few weeks to read the manuscript thoroughly and to write a report/ratio, approaching their general impression on the article, like their precise comments on possible errors or inaccuracies.

The editor then takes note of the reports/ratios of the members of the reading panel, and made share with the authors of his decision publish or not the article. The editor frequently follows the opinion of the relecteurs, but its decision remains independent. In case of doubt (for example if the reports/ratios are obviously contradictory), the editor can call upon a third, even a fourth opinion. In all the cases, it transmits to the authors a letter explanations on its decision, as well as a copy of the reports/ratios. In addition to acceptance and the rejection without conditions, the decision can be more moderate (acceptance subject to corrections, or encouragement with resoumettre a new version). Traditionally, the reports/ratios are anonymous, only the name of the editor is known authors. However, more and more of newspapers encourage a transparent management of the process, and authorize, even impose, the disclosure of the names of the members of the reading panel.

Recruitment of the experts

Styles of second reading

Critics of the system

Failures

Free or dynamic reading panel

History of the creation of the reading panels

Reading panel and plagiarism

Abuse the relecteurs due to their information

Validation by the pars of software

Validation by the pars and public policy

Random links: