Peer reviewing

[dryer at buffalo.edu]

One point that I think is worth mentioning that has not been made 
explicitly in this discussion (although I may have overlooked it) is that 
the process of peer review is taken far more seriously for journals than it 
is for edited volumes.  There is usually a far higher chance of rejection 
and often the reviews are more helpful.  And this is the reason why journal 
publications tend in some sense to be worth more than chapters in edited 
volumes and why they are justifiably treated as worth more in tenure and 
promotion decisions.

While I believe that the future lies in online journals, my worry is that 
the peer review process will never be taken as seriously as it is for 
printed journals.  There is something of a Catch-22 here.  While on the one 
hand the availability of electronic publishing renders the cost of 
publishers as "middle-men" unnecessary, the very fact that there are 
companies making money that they will not make if they do not provide a 
good product means that it is almost inevitable that the peer review 
process for printed journals will always be taken more seriously than for 
online journals.

Matthew