RAID Review (Reverse Anon Incentivized Direct Review)

Share

Fixing what’s wrong in Peer Review w/ RAID Review (Reverse Anon Incentivized Direct Review)

(An introduction to RAID Review. See http://www.raidreviews.org for more.)

It’s widely accepted that the reviewers can be anon but the scientists cannot. Why is that?

Is this a good idea?

Should the world be conflating the credibility of the authors prior record with the veracity of the most recent data?

Why do we expect anon peer reviewers (who aren’t paid to prioritize their time) to deliver exceptional review for free when Elsevier and most journals demand “processing fees” in a digital world? Is this not a tragedy of the intellectual commons? Are we surprised retraction rates at nature and science are as high as they are with a strategy no business or incentive minded organization would ever resort to? The best minds have a price tag for their time. The idle minds do not and become the review troves. Price signals matter and the religious belief that no money can go to reviewers during a review while they readily flow to the Journal is hypocrisy and destructive.

What if modern day peer to peer or crypto-empowered peer review reversed all of these incentives?

Some will protest “But it’s not pure to pay money!” Well, there is already money in peer review. The 1000 USD paid to a RAID Reviewer for prompt service is comparable to the 1000  USD document processing fee here:

https://f1000research.com/for-authors/article-processing-charges

Scientists that are anonymous and reviewers that are not? Peer review with a transparent price signal versus free anon review?

Looks like the experiment is being tried at KratomDNA.org

Bitcoin bounty for rapid peer review and the reviewers can’t attack or take faith in the authors. They have to read the data not the resume.

Imagine if reviewers have UBER ratings and a market evolves for the very best? Imagine the benefit to science if we applied the concepts of Human Action to science?

What if you woke up one day realized there is no easy way to publish scientific data anon? If all scientists are AML/ KYC then they are priests of those that can control them.

The financial incentive, and cutting out the Journal is a blow to copyright on Scientific literature and that’s a great thing. Oh, by the way, the Kratom Genome Project just nailed our RAID Review plans to the front door of science. Meet RAID Review. 

Also, here’s the first instance of RAID Review.