Blog Comments vs. Peer Review: Which Way Makes a Book Better?

Autor/in	Young, Jeffrey R.
Titel	Blog Comments vs. Peer Review: Which Way Makes a Book Better?
Quelle	In: Chronicle of Higher Education, 54 (2008) 21, (1 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0009-5982
Schlagwörter	Peer Evaluation; Computer Mediated Communication; College Faculty; Book Reviews; Evaluation Methods + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Computerkonferenz; Fakultät; Book reviewing; Book review; Rezension
Abstract	What if scholarly books were peer reviewed by anonymous blog comments rather than by traditional, selected peer reviewers? This is the question posed by an unusual experiment that was started recently by Noah Wardrip-Fruin, an an assistant professor of communication at the University of California at San Diego. His experiment was started after his book, "Expressive Processing: Digital Frictions, Computer Games, and Software Studies," was reviewed by the people behind the blog, Grand Text Auto, and the MIT Press. This article describes the processes involved in this "blog-based peer review." This article also describes how the blog-based peer review may be more helpful than the traditional peer review method. (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Chronicle of Higher Education. 1255 23rd Street NW Suite 700, Washington, DC 20037. Tel: 800-728-2803; e-mail: circulation@chronicle.com; Web site: http://chronicle.com/
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10