Refereeing the Game of Peer Review

Joseph A. Raelin

EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, 2008, vol. 7, issue 1, 124-129

Abstract: In this dialogue, the author depicts the journal peer review process as a high-stakes game involving three parties: editor, reviewer, and author. In light of a non-infrequent transposition of what should have been a constructive professional development process into a self-promotional social process, critiques of peer review have abounded, such as the "as-is" process recently recommended by Eric Tsang and Bruno Frey in this journal. While the "as-is" process highlights and potentially remedies some of the abuses of the system, there may be less radical options through professional education and development to preserve the critical developmental function of peer review.

Keywords: Peer review; Professional autonomy; Professional publication; Academic freedom; Peer control; Professional development (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: J44 L84 M14 M53 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2008
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/268492/1/Peer%20review%20ms..pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:zbw:espost:268492

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters from ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics ().