The peer-review process

.

Chapter 7 in Publish or Perish, 2018, pp 119-137 from Edward Elgar Publishing

Abstract: Peer review, which determines what does and does not get published, is so problematical that alternatives are being sought. Because of the problems associated with the process, journal ranking is too problematical to be useful. Peer review, which can be described as a stochastic process, has so many shortcomings, including methodological and ideological bias, bias against new ideas, confirmation bias, obsession with finding faults, reckless and dishonest practices, referee incompetence, lack of scrutiny, and delays. Several alternatives to the current per review practices have been suggested, including the cascading and portable peer review models. For all the problems associated with the practice, looking for alternatives to peer review is a matter that is taken seriously.

Keywords: Research Methods (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781786434920.00013.xml (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 503 Service Temporarily Unavailable

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:elg:eechap:17542_7

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.e-elgar.com

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Chapters from Edward Elgar Publishing
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Darrel McCalla ().