Commentary on “Scientific Utopia: I. Opening scientific communication”

Nosek and Bar-Anan suggest that psychologists should embrace digital communication in order to create a system that accomplishes a number of worthy goals. Their proposed system would improve access to research, reduce the burden on reviewers, and reduce the financial burden on universities. It would undoubtedly decrease the excessive amount of time between the conduct of research and the publication of results. However, for many, speed and efficiency are far less important than the core purpose of science: the production of accurate knowledge. Currently the burden of identifying truth falls to editors and reviewers who altruistically donate their efforts toward the production of better knowledge. There is no pretense of efficiency, but the hope is that expert peer review leads to the dissemination of articles with well-The Wisdom of Crowds in a Data Rich Utopia supported results. The recommendations that Nosek and Bar-Anan make are likely to also be evaluated on this singular dimension by many social scientists. Specifically, can the “wisdom of crowds ” approach that they advocate – where any member of a professional society can review any article – truly lead to better scientific knowledge? I