Accept that the goal of peer-reviews in the scientonomic workflow is evaluation for pursuitworthiness rather than acceptability.
While it is implicit in the scientonomic workflow, that paper submissions are evaluated for pursuitworthiness rather than acceptability, this is yet to be stated and accepted explicitly. As seen in the case of the traditional workflow, when the goals of the peer review process are not clearly articulated, some reviewers review for pursuitworthiness, others review for acceptance, yet other review for both. As a result it is often unclear how the content of a published article should be understood - as accepted by the community or as merely pursued. Thus, to avoid confusion, it is important to state explicitly what the goals of the peer review process are in the scientonomic workflow.
Theories To Accept
- Goals of Peer Review - Pursuitworthiness (Shaw-Barseghyan-2019): The goal of peer reviews in the scientonomic workflow is evaluation for pursuitworthiness rather than acceptability.
This modification attempts to answer the following question(s):
- Workflow - Goals of Peer Review: Should peer reviewers evaluate a submitted paper for the pursuitworthiness or acceptability of the content of the paper?
The modification is currently being evaluated; a verdict is pending.
Click on the Discussion tab for comments.
- Shaw, Jamie and Barseghyan, Hakob. (2019) Problems and Prospects with the Scientonomic Workflow. Scientonomy 3, 1-14. Retrieved from https://scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/33509.