An issue with the peer review process is that typically the reviewers are people you know and are working in the same area, albeit the reviewers are typically anonymous, at least in my field. I worked with one fellow who actually signed all his reviews as he didn’t believe in the anonymous aspect. Some may think that the process is biased since the reviewers may be direct competitors for grants. However, most reviewers, I believe, are interested in furthering their reputation. Doing a poor job, or biased job, at reviewing a paper is inconsistent with that goal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill14564
The article did not say they were being paid to reviewing papers. That article said that those reviewing papers had received payment. Big difference.
I think you are going to have to consider the quality of those you desire to perform the peer reviews. If they are not involved with research or development in the particular field, or are not established enough to have grants, salaries, or other funding, then are they truly qualified to review that type of paper?
|