ChristianKl comments on Self-Congratulatory Rationalism - Less Wrong

51 Post author: ChrisHallquist 01 March 2014 08:52AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (395)

Comments (395)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ChristianKl 30 April 2014 01:45:30PM -2 points [-]

It is a lot more than "sometimes". In my experience (mainly in computing) no journal editor or conference chair will accept a referee's report that provides nothing but than an overall rating of the paper.

That just tells us that the journals believe that the rating isn't the only thing that matters. But most journals just do things that make sense to them. The don't draft their policies based on findings of decision science.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 30 April 2014 01:57:06PM 2 points [-]

But most journals just do things that make sense to them. The don't draft their policies based on findings of decision science.

Those findings being? Aumann's theorem doesn't go the distance. Anyway, I have no knowledge of how they draft their policies, merely some of what those policies are. Do you have some information to share here?

Comment author: ChristianKl 30 April 2014 04:22:53PM -2 points [-]

For example that likert scales are nice if you want someone to give you their opinion.

Of course it might sense to actually do run experiments. Big publishers do rule over 1000's of journals so it should be easy for them to do the necessary research if the wanted to do so.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit