After this was mentioned in class, I wanted to find out a little
bit more about how content that is not peer-reviewed can still be considered a
reliable source of information.
I came across this article, which talks about the new system of
peer-reviewing when content is published instantly.
“In the case of social platforms, the metric that drives discovery is how much interaction there is with your content on the social platform in question. Examples of such interaction include the numbers of followers you have and the number of times your content is shared, liked, commented on, [and] viewed.These metrics show how much interest there is in your papers, and how widely they are read right now, and thus provide a sense of their level of impact.”
 |
| Courtesy of birgerking from flickr.com |
Personally, I’m not sure I’m ready to accept this as a
reliable peer review. While something may be popular and getting lots of likes
and shares on Facebook (we’ve all see, or even shared, those Huffington Post
articles), that doesn’t mean it is ready to be cited in an academic paper. While it’s great that ideas and content can
be published instantly, they still need to take the next step to phase three of
academic blogging to be taken seriously.
So, what are your thoughts? Can something be considered a
reliable source if it is getting a lot of attention online?
I'm with you on this one. I think you have to take into account what sort of feedback you are getting. Is it just a like? Or is it a well-thought out comment contributing to the argument? The Taylor Swift goat video got plenty of likes but that doesn't make it a work of art. So I guess as with everything else, you have to discern and sift through. There's no guarantee.
ReplyDeleteKeep in mind there is a difference between peer review and Peer Review. Often the more formal Peer Review only happens once, after you've got a finished product, and so it not that helpful in terms of helping you to improve what you are writing. Informal peer reviews are more powerful if they happen at multiple stages and from multiple parties.
ReplyDeleteThat is one of the dangers of Internet sources like Huff Post. I remember one time I shared one of their articles only to find out that they had grossly misrepresented the facts, and I was pretty embarrassed about it all. I think there are still reputable sources, even if they are not Peer Reviewed, but you have to be discerning in choosing which to believe and which to ignore or cautiously consume. Plato for one hated the idea of democracy because he felt that the vast majority of people lacked the practical skills and experience to be able to do what was necessary for the success of a govt, and I think the same can be said of the 'democratic' system of likes or +1s: a lot of times, people simply lack the understanding and skill to recognize and promote the things that are really worth promoting.
ReplyDelete