Access
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Correspondence
Nature 439, 782 (16 February 2006) | doi:10.1038/439782c; Published online 15 February 2006
Peer review could be improved by market forces
Klaus Jaffe1
- Laboratorio de Comportamiento, Universidad Simön Bolívar, Apartado 89000, Caracas 1080, Venezuela
Although peer review seems the best system for quality control of scientific publications and grant proposals ("Three cheers for peers" Nature 439, 118; 2006), we might try to improve it. Market forces are known to optimize complex systems where multiple players have conflicting interests.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.
RESEARCH
Grants awarded on the basis of political criteriaNature Correspondence (24 Jan 2008)
Venezuelan government is backing scienceNature Correspondence (20 Feb 2003)
Venezuelan students are campaigning for freedomNature Correspondence (24 Jan 2008)
Step back to see how science and humanity fit in the big pictureNature Correspondence (14 Sep 2000)
Researchers face ?Catch-22? grants trapNature Correspondence (25 Mar 1999)
See all 7 matches for Research