re web mss and peer review

[HenryGee@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Henry Gee)]

Musings on web-site publication, and peer review. 
        I've been thinking about this a lot lately, as I'm on sabbatical 
from Nature (where I'm responsible for handling palaeontology, among other 
things) and am currently teaching a graduate seminar course on science 
publication here at UCLA for this winter quarter. 
        The view from Nature is that the www is a Good Thing. However, I 
feel that scientists will be sceptical about papers placed  on the web 
unless they have been through some form of peer review. As a journal editor, 
I have (of course!) a vested interest in this (after all, the web obviates 
the need for journals and editors, and could put me out of a job).
But (and it's a big 'but') my perception is that scientists would rather 
publish in journals with a high rejection rate and a stringent peer-review 
process. This is how the scientific community measures the quality of the 
material that is eventually published in such journals.
        The logical conclusion is that once journals can satisfy themselves 
about the security of subscriber passwords, they will set up subscriber-only 
web pages which will include the actual substantive contents of the journal 
-- not just summaries, as at present. I believe some journals are already 
doing this.
Henry Gee
henrygee@ess.ucla.edu
Henry Gee
henrygee@ess.ucla.edu