Pains and Gains of Peer-Reviewing in Software Engineering

摘要

Peer-reviewing constitutes the reference mechanism for assuring the quality of scientific contributions in software engineering. In the teaser of this column series (i.e., [1]) we provided an overview of the current trends for peer reviewing in software engineering, including experienced pains and gains. Some of the pains and gains reported in [1] are factual, e.g., the workload coming along with the review tasks pains the reviewers, while the credit for their review efforts is surely a gain. However, some aspects of current review processes motivate a discussion in the community: Which is the "best" setting for maximizing review gains, while at the same time minimizing pains? Are currently adopted peer-review processes sustainable on the long run? Is pre-publication peer-reviewing the best option for ensuring the quality of scientific contributions, notably at conferences? What about other options, such as post-publication open peer-reviewing?