Under Review

In peer review we (don't) trust: How peer review's filtering poses a systemic risk to science

Antifragile journal mithridatism peer review researchers.one

Cite as:

Harry Crane and Ryan Martin (2018). In peer review we (don't) trust: How peer review's filtering poses a systemic risk to science. RESEARCHERS.ONE, https://www.researchers.one/article/2018-09-17.

Abstract:

This article describes how the filtering role played by peer review may actually be harmful rather than helpful to the quality of the scientific literature. We argue that, instead of trying to filter out the low-quality research, as is done by traditional journals, a better strategy is to let everything through but with an acknowledgment of the uncertain quality of what is published, as is done on the RESEARCHERS.ONE platform.  We refer to this as "scholarly mithridatism."  When researchers approach what they read with doubt rather than blind trust, they are more likely to identify errors, which protects the scientific community from the dangerous effects of error propagation, making the literature stronger rather than more fragile.