The Economist has a short editorial on two recent science flubs that ended up being ‘reviewed’ publicly on social media (including STAP stem cell papers from Dr Obokata published in Nature and Nature). This type of ‘peer-review’ is somewhat unorthodox, but in both cases it got the job done. Will this change the way academia handles review of scientific findings?
The public, however, pay for most of this stuff (science). That open peer review gives them a glimpse into the reality of life inside the ivory tower is probably a good thing. Despite the activities of people like Dr Obokata, science is one of the most trustworthy human activities. But as Ronald Reagan put it in a different context, “Trust, but verify.