Got to get back into the habit, and for that, I'm taking a cue from Donna, who took it from me a few years back. Think of blog posts not as Montaignean essays, but as post-it notes. Slap a max on your post rather than a min. So here's mine for the day, inspired by Kent Anderson's post on making peer review more transparent. Equally worthwhile are the comments on that post--I'm not always convinced by the will-to-transparency, and there's good discussion of that issue below the post itself.
That being said, what if our journals were required to include information about number of reviewers, revisions, and time from submission to review to publication? Would that information change the way we prioritize our field's outlets?
