For this system to ultimately take the place of the current peer-review system, universities would need to figure out how to evaluate scholars’ productivity for the purposes of granting tenure.
I enjoyed reading this. As a naturopathic veterinary practitioner, I have often found myself running up against the orthodoxy. No surprise there. But what really gets me time and time again is how the orthodoxy worships at the alter of P<.05. If an experiment doesn't reach the P<.05 threshold, the results are basically useless and unpublishable. The article says that even negative results should be published, and I agree, if only to see what didn't work. But even that still worships at the alter of P<.05. There ought to be more published about individual case studies as each case in practice presents itself uniquely. Worshipping at the alter of P<.05 plays into the hands of industrialized, standardized pharmaceutical medicine. And while conventional medicine is great at emergency treatment and stabilization, a vast amount of cases are not emergencies (as well as chronic) and need individualized attention rather than only looking if something to utilize passed the threshold of P<.05
Not sure how to be free of that basic tenet, but it wasn't mentioned in the article as something likely needing attention.
I enjoyed reading this. As a naturopathic veterinary practitioner, I have often found myself running up against the orthodoxy. No surprise there. But what really gets me time and time again is how the orthodoxy worships at the alter of P<.05. If an experiment doesn't reach the P<.05 threshold, the results are basically useless and unpublishable. The article says that even negative results should be published, and I agree, if only to see what didn't work. But even that still worships at the alter of P<.05. There ought to be more published about individual case studies as each case in practice presents itself uniquely. Worshipping at the alter of P<.05 plays into the hands of industrialized, standardized pharmaceutical medicine. And while conventional medicine is great at emergency treatment and stabilization, a vast amount of cases are not emergencies (as well as chronic) and need individualized attention rather than only looking if something to utilize passed the threshold of P<.05
Not sure how to be free of that basic tenet, but it wasn't mentioned in the article as something likely needing attention.
For physics researchers, we have https://www.ssrn.com/index.cfm/en/physicsrn/ and https://physicsoverflow.org/