---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Stevan Harnad
> To: [Identity Deleted]
> Date: 2/1/2005 7:23:27 AM
> Subject: CogPrints is not a publisher nor a peer-reviewer
>
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005, [Identity Deleted] wrote:
>
> > Dear Professor Harnad:
> >
> > We are writing an introductory textbook on -------- and have found
> > the article ----------- by -------------
> > on Cogprints. <http://cogprints.org/------
> >
> > The article and its information is very interesting but we would like
> > to verify the source with you before we include a reference to it or
> > your website. Is it from a larger publication by ------?
>
> Dear -----,
>
> It is important for you to understand that CogPrints is merely a repository in
> which authors can self-archive their papers in order to make them accessible
> webwide. It is not a publication and certainly not a peer-reviewed journal. There
> is a metadata field in CogPrints where authors can indicate whether the material
> is published and peer reviewed, and if so, what journal it appeared in. Otherwise
> the paper is merely an unpublished ms. It gains no further authority in virtue
> of having been self-archived in CogPrints.
>
> [Identity deleted] is, as far as I know, an independent scholar,
> unaffiliated with any institution. Nor has he published much in
> peer-reviewed journals. (I do not believe that the paper in question
> has been published anywhere.) His writing has accordingly not been
> fact-checked or vetted by peers; it is simply self-published.
>
> I would urge you to use unrefereed material with caution if you wish to say
> reliable and authoritative things about it in your textbook. There is a good
> deal of published writing on --------. But you should focus on what has been
> published in validated, peer-reviewed sources, rather than just what happens
> to be accessible on the Web.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Stevan Harnad
Received on Tue Feb 01 2005 - 15:59:18 GMT