Discussão sobre a avaliação aberta, no âmbito da Ciência Aberta

Abstract

The publication of scientific discoveries changes periodically as a result of the massive and impactful presence of Information and Communication Technology (ICT), as well as its processes, including "opening" movements. Open Science has shown an innovative and interesting path for several initiatives, including the Open Peer Review . The latter promotes a heated discussion between researchers and editors, resulting mainly from existing conflicts of interest. The present study aimed to evaluate the scarce and available literature on Open Peer Evaluation, in order to identify concepts and trends for using Editors in the implementation of this new evaluation modality. This subject is quite pertinent and challenging at a time when the world of “speed” presents a new paradigm for everyone involved in scientific editing. Although theoretically has advantages, as drastically changes traditionally accepted procedures, including a double-blind assessment, an openness of the contents and results obtained is a reality and has a drastic impact on the production of scientific knowledge. It is possible that this "opening" is irreversible, since about 70% of the published science in the world has no reproducibility. Openness of scientific data and evaluator would provide transparency and would be a way to soften the huge public investment in scientific research without returning to the community