From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Accept that the goal of peer-reviews in the scientonomic workflow is evaluation for pursuitworthiness rather than acceptability.

The modification was suggested to Scientonomy community by Hakob Barseghyan and Jamie Shaw on 22 December 2019.1 The modification was accepted on 25 February 2023.


While it is implicit in the scientonomic workflow, that paper submissions are evaluated for pursuitworthiness rather than acceptability, this is yet to be stated and accepted explicitly. As seen in the case of the traditional workflow, when the goals of the peer review process are not clearly articulated, some reviewers review for pursuitworthiness, others review for acceptance, yet other review for both. As a result it is often unclear how the content of a published article should be understood - as accepted by the community or as merely pursued. Thus, to avoid confusion, it is important to state explicitly what the goals of the peer review process are in the scientonomic workflow.


Theories To Accept

Questions Answered

This modification attempts to answer the following question(s):


The workshop discussion of this modification

The modification was accepted on 25 February 2023. The decision was made during the 2023 scientonomy workshop. The modification was summarized by Paul Patton as essentially a ratification of current scientonomic practice. Jamie Shaw raised some concerns about how we don’t have adequately defined norms that must be satisfied for pursuitworthiness, which may make this modification trivial. Discussion about how peer-reviewers’ notions of pursuitworthiness may veer close to acceptability ensued. Nevertheless, the modification passed with 83% of the votes to accept (10/12).

Sciento-2019-0001 Voting Results.png

Click on the Discussion tab for comments.


  1. ^  Shaw, Jamie and Barseghyan, Hakob. (2019) Problems and Prospects with the Scientonomic Workflow. Scientonomy 3, 1-14. Retrieved from