RE: PLOS article metrics

[George Porter <george@library.caltech.edu>]

I agree with Joe Esposito that PLoS One is blazing a trail of 
initial peer review-light.  However, he misses the continuing 
peer review which takes place in their open commentary system.

The PLoS One model strikes me as a streamlined version of the 
dual publication, draft paper followed by open peer review and 
open commentary, in turn followed by final, polished publication 
model pioneered by the European Geosciences Union with, among 
others, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions 
<www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/>/Atmospheric Chemistry and 
Physics <http://www.atmos-chem-phys.org/>.  A similar economics 
dual journal exists, Economics Discussion Papers/Economics 
<http://www.economics-ejournal.org/>.

The value of extended, pre-publication peer review may be a 
question in light of these innovative models, but the value of 
review by the authors peers does not appear to be in doubt.

George S. Porter
Sherman Fairchild Library
California Institute of Technology
Telephone (626) 395-3409 Fax (626) 431-2681